Highway 61 Stormwater Natural Drainage and Retrofit Identification Project (306-10-07)

Minnesota’s Lake Superior Coastal Program
Highway 61 Stormwater Natural Drainage

and Retrofit Identification Project
August 2008
Prepared by the Minnesota Board of Soil and Water Resources
Julie A. McDonnell, Project Specialist, BWSR
Al Kean, Chief Engineer, BWSR
in consultation with
Dwayne Stenlund, Erosion Control Specialist, MnDOT
Project No. 306-10-07
Contract No. A78906
This project was funded in part under the Coastal Zone Management Act, by NOAA’s Office of Ocean and Coastal
Resource Management, in cooperation with Minnesota’s Lake Superior Coastal Program.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Highway 61 corridor along the North Shore of Lake Superior is a unique and relatively
sensitive area of Minnesota with regard to water quality in tributary streams and Lake Superior.
This is also an area of concentrated population and increasing development. The North Shore
area has three key natural characteristics that necessitate extra attention to protect water
resources, including:
1) the land surface and streams slope steeply to Lake Superior;
2) the geology involves relatively thin topsoil over infertile subsoils with high clay and/or
gravel content, and exposed bedrock in many locations; and
3) cool stream temperatures are critical for trout and other indigenous species.
These conditions were reasons to investigate and identify retrofit opportunities within the
Highway 61 corridor along the North Shore of Lake Superior.
The USEPA’s National Management Measures to Control Nonpoint Source Pollution from
Urban Areas (November 2005), Management Measure 10: Existing Development defines
retrofits to involve the modification of existing surface water runoff control structures or surface
water conveyance systems that were initially designed to control flooding, to also serve a water
quality improvement function. Various local and regional resource management plans for the
North Shore area were reviewed to identify priority areas for water quality protection and
restoration, transportation infrastructure and other improvements planned, and related
opportunities for retrofit practices.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and other local and state government
units have participated in several demonstration projects within the North Shore area in recent
years to help identify effective practices to address the key natural characteristics of the area
identified above. Best Management Practices (BMPs) for construction stormwater control in
Minnesota and elsewhere also continue to develop. These and other information sources were
used to identify retrofit practices applicable to the Highway 61 corridor along the North Shore.
Recommended retrofit BMPs include:

1) Enhanced Runoff Velocity Control, Detention and Biotreatment
a) Check Dams
1) Biologs / Biorolls
2) Rock Checks
3) Filter Berm Checks
b) Runoff Diversion Chevrons
c) Rain Gardens and Bioswales (Bioretention)
2) Stormwater Inlet and Culvert Filters
a) Storm Drain Inlet Filters
b) Conduit Inlet or Outlet Filters
3) Accelerated Revegetation
a) Erosion Control Blankets
b) Compost Blankets
c) Compost Logs
d) Compost Grout
2
Because topsoil is very limited, subsoils relatively infertile and bedrock exposed in much of the
North Shore area, several of the recommended retrofit BMPs include the use of compost as a
topsoil substitute and multi-purpose biolog fill material for accelerated revegetation of disturbed
areas. Demonstration projects within the Highway 61 corridor and elsewhere have proven
compost to be a very successful material for accelerated revegetation, as well as biotreatment of
runoff.
Maps, aerial photos and field investigations were used to identify drainage situations and
locations that have opportunities for enhanced runoff energy dissipation, settling, infiltration
and/or biotreatment prior to discharge into North Shore streams and Lake Superior. These
locations include opportunities for implementation of one or more of the recommended retrofit
BMPs.
It is recommended that township, county and state transportation authorities, as well as cities,
other government units and private individuals, pursue opportunities for implementation of
retrofit BMPs to protect and restore the sensitive water quality of the unique North Shore and
Lake Superior.
3
Table of Contents
Section Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ………………………………………………………..…………. 2
INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………….. 6
DEFINITION OF RETROFITS………………………………………………………………. 7
PROJECT PURPOSE AND SCOPE………………………………………………………….. 8
INFORMATION SOURCES AND SUMMARIES…………………………………………... 8
RECOMMENDED RETROFIT PRACTICES……………………………………………….. 10
Categories of Applicable Retrofit BMPs……………………………………………………… 11
Descriptions of Applicable Retrofit BMPs……………………………………………………. 11
1) Enhanced Runoff Velocity Control, Detention and Biotreatment………………………… 11
1)a) Check Dams……………………………………………………………………………... 12
1)b) Runoff Diversion Chevrons……………………………………………………………... 14
1)c) Rain Gardens and Bioswales (Bioretention)…………………………………………….. 15
2) Storm Drain Inlet and Culvert Filters……………………………………………………… 18
2)a) Storm Drain Inlet Filters / Inserts……………………………………………………….. 18
2)b) Conduit Inlet and/or Outlet Filters………………………………………………………. 19
3) Accelerated Revegetation………………………………………………………………….. 19
3)a) Erosion Control Blankets………………………………………………………………… 20
3)b) Compost Blankets………………………………………………………………………... 22
3)c) Compost Logs……………………………………………………………………………. 23
3)d) Compost Grout…………………………………………………………………………… 24
POTENTIAL RETROFIT LOCATIONS……………………………………………………… 25
OVERVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER PERMIT REQUIREMENTS……….. 25
CONCLUSIONS……………………………………………………………………………….. 26
4
List of Figures
Figure Number and Title Page

1. North Shore Retrofit Identification Project Area ………………………………………… 6
2. Compost Biolog Check Dams in a Steep Drainageway…………………………………... 13
3. Compost Biolog Check Dams in Highway 61 Ditch……………………………………… 13
4. Riprap Check Dams……………………………………………………………………….. 14
5. Compost Bag Chevron Around a Culvert Inlet…………………………………………… 14
6. Compost Log, Compost and Blanket Chevron…………………………………………… 15
7. Example Rain Garden in an Urban Setting………………………………………………. 15
8. Bioswale in Highway 61 Road Ditch (2006)…………………………………………….. 16
9. Caribou River Wayside (Highway 61 Milepost 70.7)……………………………………. 17
10. Catch-All Stormwater Inlet Filter………………………………………………………… 18
11. Stormwater Outlet Filter………………………………………………………………….. 19
12. Cleaned Road Ditch, E. Shilhon Road, Lake County, near Highway 61………………… 20
13. Compost Blanket, Highway 61, Cook Co. (2003)………………………………………... 22
14. Compost Blanket, Highway 61, Cook Co. (2003)………………………………………... 23
15. Compost Logs and Blanket at Silver Cliff (2006)………………………………………… 23
16. Compost Grout of Rock Side Slope (2003)………………………………………………. 24
17. Compost Grout, Potential Application (2006)……………………………………………. 24
List of Appendices
Appendix A – Summary of Pertinent Water Quality and Related Information for North Shore
Rivers and Creeks
Appendix B – Compilation of Local Government Plans Relevant to the Highway 61 Corridor –
North Shore Retrofit Identification Project
Appendix C – Potential Retrofit Sites in the Highway 61 Corridor – North Shore Retrofit
Identification Project
5
If all of the world's water were to fit into a gallon jug, the amount of fresh water would be
just one tablespoon full. Yet almost half of our nation's 3.6 million miles of rivers and
streams are threatened or impaired. Search out practical tips on things you can do to
protect and improve the quality of the rivers close to you.
– The Nature Conservancy
Lake Superior contains approximately 10% of this relative tablespoon of fresh water
worldwide and over 50% of the water in the Great Lakes.
INTRODUCTION
Lake Superior is an outstanding natural resource, as are its tributary streams and coastal zone.
The watersheds of the tributary streams along the North Shore of Lake Superior include vast
areas of forest and wetlands that help many of these streams run cool and perennial. Together
with the nearshore zone of Lake Superior, these tributary streams provide critical habitat for fish
and wildlife, as well as great attraction for recreation and associated development. Lake Superior
is also a drinking water source for a number of communities along the North Shore.
The Highway 61 corridor parallels the North Shore of Lake Superior from Duluth to the
international border with Canada (see Figure 1).
Figure 1. North Shore Retrofit Identification Project Area
6
Within the Highway 61 corridor along the North Shore of Lake Superior, there are three key
natural characteristics that necessitate extra attention to protect water resources:
2) the geology involves relatively thin topsoil over infertile subsoils with high clay
and/or gravel content, and exposed bedrock in many locations; and
The Highway 61 corridor is where a majority of people live within the Lake Superior basin in
Minnesota. This is a primary corridor for travel and recreation, as well as commercial and
residential development (four cities, 12 towns, one Reservation, numerous businesses, resorts,
campgrounds, and state parks). In each of the three counties through which the Highway 61
corridor passes (St. Louis, Lake, and Cook), the percent private land within 1 km of Lake
Superior greatly exceeds the percent private land within the watershed (Schomberg, et al., 2006).
Housing units and population have increased along the North Shore steadily since 1990, and are
projected to continue to increase (Schomberg, et al., 2006). This rapid growth has driven the
demand for second homes, resorts, services and improvements of the transportation system,
increasing the amount of impervious surface by approximately 2,000 acres from 1990 - 2000 and
necessitating substantial disturbance of vegetation, soil and bedrock. These trends typically have
resulted in altered watershed hydrology with increased runoff, higher amounts of sediment and
other pollutants and increased temperatures in some North Shore streams.
Minimizing soil disturbance, accelerating restabilization of disturbed areas, and managing runoff
rates and volumes associated with existing and new development are critical ways to restore and
protect water quality along the North Shore. These objectives can be substantially achieved by
implementing associated Best Management Practices (BMPs). Maintenance and improvement of
existing transportation infrastructure, including roads, streets, parking areas and associated
stormwater conveyance systems, are substantial reasons for soil disturbing work in the Highway
61 corridor associated with existing and new development. Stormwater runoff from
transportation infrastructure can also be a significant source of suspended solids, nutrients,
chlorides, metals and oil, as well as increased stormwater runoff temperatures. Existing runoff
management systems along, and tributary to, the Highway 61 corridor provide substantial
opportunities for retrofit BMPs. The Coastal Management Measures required by the Lake
Superior Coastal Nonpoint Program include retrofit practices in areas of existing development as
an important program component to protect and restore water quality.
DEFINITION OF RETROFITS
The USEPA’s National Management Measures to Control Nonpoint Source Pollution from
Urban Areas (November 2005), Management Measure 10: Existing Development defines
retrofits to involve the modification of existing surface water runoff control structures or surface
water conveyance systems that were initially designed to control flooding, to also serve a water
quality improvement function. This may involve modifying a structure or drainage system to
increase runoff detention time, increase infiltration, trap sediment and associated pollutants,
and/or filter out other pollutants (includes bioretention, biofiltration, biotreatment and
bioreaction practices). Retrofits can also apply to redevelopment and improvement of existing
development, particularly where land availability for water quality treatment practices is limited.
7
PROJECT PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The water quality of North Shore streams has been declining since the 1970s, based on
monitoring since that time (MPCA 2002). Many of the North Shore streams that have been tested
for water quality and temperature are found to be impaired and consequently have been listed on
the State’s 303(d) impaired waters list. Waters of the State with an impaired status are required
to be restored to the water quality standards applicable for their designated use. There appears to
be a trend toward declining water quality in the Lake Superior watershed where urbanization and
other development is increasing, particularly along the Highway 61 corridor. This is currently
evident in streams between Duluth and Two Harbors, as well as the lower Poplar River in Cook
County (MPCA 2002). Thus, there is a need to implement retrofits into maintenance and
improvement of existing development that will help reduce pollutants entering North Shore
waters.
The Minnesota Coastal Nonpoint Program encourages retrofits within the Coastal Management
Measures categories of Urban/Rural Runoff, Site Development, Existing Development, Pollution
Prevention, Road and Highway Planning, and Wetland and Riparian Areas to “protect areas that
provide important water quality benefits and/or are particularly susceptible to erosion and
sediment loss”, and to “limit increases of impervious areas except where necessary”.
The scope of this project involves the Highway 61 corridor from Duluth to the U.S.-Canada
border. The project has a focus on retrofits associated with maintenance and improvement of
existing transportation infrastructure and associated runoff management systems, as well as
runoff management systems within existing development along the Highway 61 corridor. Many
of the BMPs recommended for retrofits are also applicable for new development.
This project report provides concepts and guidance for state agencies, local government units,
developers, landowners and contractors regarding how to better manage the water resources in
this region for water quality and habitat protection, while conducting road, street and parking
area maintenance and improvement, as well as residential and commercial development within
the Highway 61 corridor. BMP recommendations are focused on addressing the challenges
presented by the key natural characteristics of the area identified above.
INFORMATION SOURCES AND SUMMARIES

Following are information sources that were researched for this project.
1) Water quality assessment data:
Lake Superior Basin Plan, February 2004
Minnesota 303(d) impaired waters list (2006)
An Assessment of Representative Lake Superior Basin Tributaries (MPCA 2002)
2) Basin, watershed and local water management plans:
Lake Superior Basin Plan, February 2004
Local Water Management Plans for St. Louis, Lake and Cook Counties
St. Louis, Lake, and Cook Soil and Water Conservation District Annual Work Plans
(2006)
8
Land Use and Stormwater Management Plans for North Shore communities (as
available)
Road Crossing Survey of Minnesota’s North Shore Tributaries to Lake Superior for
Fish Passage (DNR 2004)
3) MNDOT maintenance and improvement plans/schedule for Highway 61 (2007-2024)
4) County Highway Department plans for road and ditch maintenance adjacent to Highway
61 (2006 - 2007)
5) Building Superior Coastal Communities, MN Sea Grant Publication (2006)
6) Best Practices for Meeting DNR General Public Waters Work Permit, GP 2004-001,
March 2006
7) Pertinent demonstration project experience in the region:
Great Lakes Commission Project – Applying Natural Restoration Techniques to Slope
Restoration – Grand Marais Lake Superior Shoreline Area, MN
Great Lakes Commission Project – Grass Swale with Rock Checks and Biofiltration
at Glensheen Mansion
8) MNDOT, Local Road Research Board and Federal Highway Administration publications:
Improving the Design of Roadside Ditches to Decrease Transportation-Related
Surface Water Pollution, June 2003, 2004-11
(http://www.mrr.dot.state.mn.us/research/pdf/200411.pdf)
Erosion Control Handbook for Local Roads, 2003-08
(http://www.lrrb.gen.mn.us/pdf/200308.pdf)
MNDOT Erosion and Sediment Control Certification & E-Team Training Program
2001 (http://www.dot.state.mn.us/environment/pdf_files/TrnManCl.pdf)
9) Recent stormwater bioretention guidelines:
Design Guidelines for Stormwater Bioretention Facilities, February 2006, Water
Resources Institute, University of Wisconsin System, Publication No. WIS-WRI-06-
01 (http://www.aqua.wisc.edu/Publications/PDFs/StormwaterBioretention.pdf)
Minnesota Stormwater Manual, Chapter 12-6, Bioretention, Version 2, January 2008
(http://www.pca.state.mn.us/publications/wq-strm9-01.pdf)
Bioretention Basin, Code 712, Conservation Practice Standard, NRCS Minnesota,
June 2008 (http://efotg.nrcs.usda.gov/references/public/MN/712mn.pdf)
10) Knowledge and experience of key individuals related to potential retrofit BMPs:
Dwayne Stenlund, CPESC, Erosion Control Engineering Unit, MNDOT
Todd Campbell, District 1 Hydraulics Engineer, MNDOT
Staff of North Shore Soil and Water Conservation Districts
11) Site investigations along the Highway 61 corridor.
12) Various available literature regarding the effects of potential retrofit BMPs.
These information sources were used to help identify and prioritize locations along the Highway
61 corridor with water quality concerns (or increased likelihood of future concerns) that could
9
benefit from retrofits, as well as to identify recommended retrofit BMPs and specific locations
for potential retrofit BMPs.
Appendix A is a Summary of Pertinent Water Quality and Related Information for North Shore
Rivers and Creeks. This table consolidates pertinent information from a number of the above
sources and helps catalog recently identified impairments, trends, concerns and related activities.
This compilation includes available information about county and state highway construction
project schedules. Appendix A illustrates that over time, North Shore stream water quality has
been decreasing, impacts from nonpoint source pollution are increasing, and that a number of
active projects and citizen/watershed groups are in place that are working on these issues. Water
quality data for North Shore streams generally indicates a need to incorporate BMPs wherever
feasible and practical, including retrofit BMPs within existing development. Review of this
summary information identifies general priority locations where retrofit project implementation
should be pursued (e.g. near stream reaches with impaired status or declining water quality
and/or where upcoming state or county highway reconstruction will be conducted in the area,
which could be an opportune time to install retrofits).
Appendix B is a Compilation of Local Government Plans Relevant to the Highway 61 Corridor –

North Shore Retrofit Identification Project. Many of these local and regional plans identify
related priority concerns, trends and action items regarding water quality restoration and
protection along the North Shore of Lake Superior. The Lake Superior Basin Plan provides an
assessment of all of the watersheds within the basin, many of which cross the Highway 61
corridor along the North Shore. Although the local government plans tend to be relatively
general with regard to North Shore stream priority concerns and action items, these plans
identify specific water quality restoration needs for impaired waters along the North Shore,
including the Sucker, Knife, and Poplar Rivers. Municipal stormwater management plans
identify general and specific priority concerns and action items related to creeks, rivers and
stormwater management infrastructure within the associated jurisdiction.
RECOMMENDED RETROFIT PRACTICES

As maintenance, redevelopment and new development occurs within the Highway 61 corridor
along the North Shore (including both rural and urban areas), BMPs are and should be used to
control surface water runoff and reduce associated pollutant loads to protect and restore water
quality in creeks and rivers, as well as Lake Superior. This includes retrofit BMPs within
existing stormwater conveyance systems, as well as innovative erosion control techniques during
maintenance and improvement of transportation and stormwater infrastructure and other existing
development. Retrofit BMPs can be implemented to slow, detain and retain water to reduce
erosion, as well as to enhance settling, biotreatment, infiltration and evapotranspiration. Within
the Highway 61 corridor along the North Shore, retrofit BMPs, as well as new development
BMPs, should consider the 3 key natural characteristics of the area identified above that
necessitate extra attention to protect water resources.
10
Categories of Applicable Retrofit BMPs
Recommended retrofit BMPs identified for the Highway 61 corridor can be organized into three
general categories:

This category includes a number of practices that can be implemented as retrofits during
maintenance or improvement of transportation infrastructure and other existing
development for water quality restoration and protection, including:
a) Check Dams
1) Biologs / Biorolls
2) Rock Checks
3) Filter Berm Checks
b) Runoff Diversion Chevrons
c) Rain Gardens and Bioswales (Bioretention)
Some of these practices utilize familiar methods and materials, while others utilize more
innovative materials and techniques to protect and restore water quality.

This category of retrofit BMPs includes:
a) Storm Drain Inlet Filters
b) Conduit Inlet or Outlet Filters
These practices can provide filtration at the inlet or outlet of stormwater conveyance
structures to collect debris and pollutants from road and parking lot runoff, as well as
natural conveyance systems, before it enters Lake Superior or tributary streams. Filter
media can include chemical treatment capability.
This category specifically addresses the challenging characteristic of thin, infertile topsoil
and subsoil and exposed bedrock along the North Shore. Specific recommended practices
include:
a) Erosion Control Blankets
b) Compost Blanket
c) Compost Logs
d) Compost Grout
These practices can be implemented as retrofit BMPs during redevelopment and improvement of
transportation infrastructure and other existing development, as well as for new development.
There is some overlap between categories, such as the biotreatment that occurs with various
applications of compost for accelerated revegetation.
Descriptions of Applicable Retrofit BMPs

Highway 61 crosses numerous rivers and creeks along the North Shore that are tributary to Lake
Superior. Road ditches along Highway 61 typically discharge directly into these rivers and
creeks. Ditches along county and township roads that connect to Highway 61 convey runoff to
11
these drainage systems. Streets and storm sewers within the cities and towns along the North
Shore also convey runoff to these constructed ditches and natural drainageways, or directly to
Lake Superior. Retrofit opportunities exist to enhance runoff velocity control, temporary
detention and biotreatment within these drainage systems to protect and restore water quality.
Materials, design and construction techniques for these types of practices have evolved
substantially in recent years, improving the application and effectiveness of these practices in
various settings, including the North Shore.
The effectiveness of runoff velocity control, temporary detention and biotreatment practices is
substantially related to the fact that the majority of precipitation events in the Midwest are
relatively small. Therefore, based on frequency of occurrence, BMPs that better manage
frequent, smaller precipitation and runoff events (including the “first flush”) can have major
benefits for water quality.
Temporary detention includes practices to reduce flow velocities and associated erosion, as well
as to increase settling of sediment and adsorbed nutrients.
Biotreatment BMPs can include:

bioretention practices, such as rain gardens and bioswales;
bioreaction or biofiltration practices, such as bioroll check dams, filter berm check dams,
compost blankets, and compost grouting of riprap or gabion baskets.
These practices utilize physical, biological and chemical processes including filtration,
adsorption, nutrient uptake and use by plant materials, nutrient volatilization, ion exchange,
microbial activity and other associated biological processes of soil and plants. Biotreatment
BMPs often strategically integrate plants, plant materials, and soil (soft materials) with hard
materials, such as rock, wire, geosynthetics and dimension lumber. The number and types of
biotreatment practices continues to grow. The Minnesota Department of Transportation, other
state agencies and local government units have demonstrated a number of these types of
practices in the Highway 61 corridor along the North Shore and continue to develop these and
other types of BMPs for erosion control and water quality protection and improvement.
1)a) Check Dams

Check dams are often used as temporary and/or permanent erosion and sediment control
practices in concentrated flow areas such as ditches, particularly where ditch grades are relatively
steep. Check dams reduce flow velocities by concentrating energy dissipation at controlled
through-flow and overflow locations. Many of the road ditches along the Highway 61 corridor
have areas with relatively steep grades, such as near stream crossings and where roads are
parallel to the general land slope toward Lake Superior. Many of these locations present
opportunities to use check dams to reduce flow velocities and erosion potential, enhance
vegetation development, increase sediment and nutrient trapping, and increase infiltration. Check
dams create very small, temporary ponding areas. They generally do not have as a purpose to
create permanent ponds.
Check dams are often 6 inches to 2 feet in height and spaced at intervals in the ditch such that the
toe elevation of a check dam is approximately the same as the crest elevation of the next
downstream check dam. The height of check dams should reflect the materials used to construct
12
the dams and applicable safety considerations at the site. It is very important that the ends of a
check dam are constructed higher than the middle, to prevent concentrated flow at the ends and
potential flanking of the structure (i.e. erosion around the ends). Check dams can be constructed
with or without a foundation erosion control strip, such as geotextile, under and downstream
from the check dam to
provide a filter beneath
the structure and a
protected stilling area
(i.e. for stilling of
turbulent overflow) on
the downstream side of
the check dam.
Biolog check dams (see

Figures 2 and 3) can be
placed and anchored
individually across
a ditch, or stacked
and appropriately
anchored to provide
greater height.
Compost-filled biologs
provide a very good
medium for growth of Figure 2. Compost Biolog Check Dams in a Steep Drainageway
vegetation at the biolog
to aid in erosion
control, biotreatment
and practice longevity.
In both of the
applications shown, the
biologs were filled with
compost. In Figure 2,
the biologs were a
retrofit along with
compost beneath the
original design of a turf
reinforcement mat
(TRM) within the
channel, to provide an
improved seedbed . In
Figure 3, a compost
blanket was also
applied to the surface of
the road ditch to
accelerate revegetation. Figure 3. Compost Biolog Check Dams in Highway 61 Ditch
13
Riprap check dams (see
Figure 4) can provide
effective energy dissipation
and flow aeration via
localized turbulent flow
through and over the
structure. Organic material
such as biologs, compost or
wood slash can be placed
within the structure or on
the upstream face of riprap
check dams to also provide
biofiltration and
biotreatment. Report
number 2004-11,
Improving the Design of
Roadside Ditches to
Decrease Transportation-
Related Surface Water
Pollution, June 2003, by Figure 4. Riprap Check Dams
MnDOT and the Local
Road Research Board, demonstrated the use of a riprap check dam with a peat-filled gabion
basket core zone for biotreatment.
1)b) Runoff Diversion Chevrons

Bridges and culverts are
typically located at low
points along a road profile,
the side slopes of road
embankments adjacent to
bridge abutment wing walls
and the ends of conduits
through the embankment
are often steepened and
these locations experience
concentrated runoff from
the road surface. Runoff
diversion chevrons can be
constructed of biorolls,
biologs, or sand- or gravel-
filled bags placed in the
shape of a chevron (i.e. an
inverted “V”) on the side
slope of the road
embankment over and Figure 5. Compost Bag Chevron Around a Culvert Inlet
14
around the end of a conduit (or half of a chevron near a bridge abutment wing wall) to reduce the
effective slope and increase
the length and roughness of
the flow path of runoff
from the road surface and
embankment side slope to
the bottom of the road ditch
(see Figure 5 and Figure 6).
Multiple rows of chevrons
can be used where
concentrations of runoff are
high and road embankment
side slopes particularly
steep. Chevrons can also
direct runoff from the
roadway to a bioswale or
another type of treatment
area in the road ditch prior
to the runoff flowing
through a culvert or bridge
under the roadway. Figure 6. Compost Log, Compost and Blanket Chevron
1)c) Rain Gardens and Bioswales (Bioretention)

Bioretention enables stormwater runoff to be reduced in volume and improved in water quality
through physical, chemical
and biological processes.
Rain gardens are relatively
shallow bioretention areas,
and bioswales are channels
with flow through
detention, both typically
designed to capture and
treat the first flush of
runoff, with overflow for
large events. Key
characteristics of
bioretention practices are
listed below. Where soil
permeability is conducive,
these practices can
substantially increase
infiltration. Through
increased infiltration and
groundwater recharge, Figure 7. Example Rain Garden in an Urban Setting
these practices can increase
15
base flows to nearby streams to help maintain naturally lower stream temperatures. These
practices typically are also aesthetic attributes to their surroundings. Figure 7 shows a rain
garden that collects and treats runoff from road and parking surfaces. Figure 8 shows a road ditch
along Highway 61 that has been transformed into a bioswale.
Key characteristics of bioretention practices include:

creating increased rainfall absorption capacity and infiltration through increased surface
and subsurface organic matter (plants, mulch and deep, healthy roots) and increased soil
permeability (sometimes via engineered soil beneath a rain garden or bioswale involving
the addition of compost and/or sand);
increased runoff detention through temporary storage above and below ground (ponded
water and saturated soils are typically maintained no longer than 48 hours above and
within the plant root zone) and at shallow depths (generally no deeper than 18 inches
above the ground surface, with 6 to 12 inches more typical);
increased evapotransporation through strategic plant materials and increased water
holding capacity in the soil profile. These practices are generally compatible with road
ditches, boulevards and shallow drainageways where the contributing drainage area is
relatively small. The Minnesota Stormwater Manual, Chapter 12-6, Bioretention
(http://www.pca.state.mn.us/publications/wq-strm9-01.pdf) provides guidance for
selecting and designing bioretention facilities. The University of Wisconsin has
developed Design Guidelines for Stormwater Bioretention Facilities with the software
RECARGA (http://www.aqua.wisc.edu/Publications/PDFs/StormwaterBioretention.pdf).
The USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), in consultation with state
and local government units in Minnesota, as well as the University of Wisconsin and
University of Minnesota, recently developed conservation practice standard 712,
Bioretention Basin (http://efotg.nrcs.usda.gov/references/public/MN/712mn.pdf).
Treating the first flush

of runoff is a key
concept and method for
water quality protection
and restoration,
particularly from urban
areas and roadways,
due to higher
concentrations of
nutrients and other
pollutants during the
first flush of impervious
surfaces. In locations
along the North Shore
where subsoils are thick
and have a high clay
content, an underdrain
may be necessary
beneath bioretention
Figure 8. Bioswale in Highway 61 Road Ditch (2006)
16
basins to lower the water level in the bioretention basin within the typical maximum 48-hour
time period required for vigorous plant health. Design guidelines for bioretention facilities in
relatively impervious soils may also include replacing or engineering some of the underlying soil
to increase its water holding capacity (for example through the addition of sand and/or compost,
as noted above). These are important retrofit practices for cities, other developed areas and
transportation corridors along the North Shore.
Selection, establishment and maintenance of native plant materials are important elements of
successful implementation of rain gardens and bioswales. Expertise in this regard continues to
grow, as the use of bioretention and biotreatment BMPs continues to expand. This includes
expertise regarding local native seed mixes, as well as live plant material selection, establishment
and maintenance for these types of practices in different areas of Minnesota. The Minnesota
Department of Transportation, Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources and a number of
Soil and Water Conservation Districts in Minnesota continue to develop and hone this type of
expertise. It is expected that applicable guidance documents will also continue to be developed
and improved.
There are numerous waysides, rest areas, scenic overlooks and other parking lots along the
Highway 61 corridor, where rain gardens and/or bioswales could help improve the quality of
surface water runoff. Many of these sites are located close to creeks and rivers and/or close to
Lake Superior. Appendix C includes a list of identified locations organized by Highway 61
milepost number. As an
example, Figure 9
shows a Caribou River
wayside, where runoff
from the parking area
concentrates in a corner
of the parking lot,
overflows the curb and
runs overland into the
Caribou River.
Installation of a rain
garden and/or bioswale
at this location could
reduce erosion, help
infiltrate runoff for
temperature control and
provide biotreatment of
runoff from the parking Figure 9. Caribou River Wayside (Highway 61 Milepost 70.7)
area.
In Grand Marais, homeowners reportedly have concerns about increased flows of water running
down city streets during rain events. Rain gardens could be created adjacent to streets, including
curb cuts, to collect, treat and reduce first flushes of runoff from city streets. Investigation of the
underlying soils would need to be conducted to determine permeability and the potential need for
underdrains. The Burnsville, MN Stormwater Retrofit Study and demonstration project (2006)
17
(http://www.burnsville.org/DocumentView.asp?DID=449) demonstrated the implementation of
rain gardens in an urban residential area that greatly reduced runoff volume and improved runoff
quality. Many other rain garden implementation projects have been completed in Minnesota in
recent years. The steep streets in Grand Marais and other North Shore towns make rain gardens
more challenging, but not impractical. The multiple benefits of runoff volume and peak flow
reduction, water quality improvement and aesthetics make rain gardens a great retrofit practice.
2) Storm Drain Inlet and Culvert Filters

The Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) program requires all but the smallest
municipal and industrial stormwater systems to treat storm water discharge to the “maximum
extent practicable.” It is generally understood that significant removal of suspended solids,
hydrocarbons, sediment, metals and nutrients is a goal. Even in areas where MS4 requirements
are not applicable, stormwater treatment is important. Urban areas with higher pollutant
concentrations, such as roadways, parking lots and tourist centers can benefit from the use of
catch basin inserts (filters) to trap pollutants prior to discharge to surface waters.
2)a) Storm Drain Inlet Filters / Inserts

There are numerous manufacturers of storm drain inserts designed to filter trash, oil and other
contaminants from stormwater runoff as it flows into storm sewer inlets. The following
discussion presents examples that are not intended as endorsements for specific products.
Geotextile Marathon Filters, Dandy Bag and Pig-Drain Inserts – These representative products
involve filter bags connected to rigid frames that are inserted into storm drain inlets, as shown in
Figure 10. Bags can include activated carbon in geotextile filter fabric. These products can filter
litter, suspended solids,
hydrocarbons, phosphorus,
nitrogen, and heavy metals
from stormwater. These
filters can yield quantifiable
results (i.e., pounds of
sediment and trash prevented
from entering surface water)
in a relatively short period of
time. They require periodic
maintenance, but can be
cleaned out at the rate of
approximately three per hour.
Looking at storm sewer inlets
as point conveyances having
direct impact to the receiving
waters reinforces the
opportunity and need to
address these identifiable Figure 10. Catch-All Stormwater Inlet Filter
conveyances of contaminants
18
to Lake Superior. Figure 10 shows an example of this type of retrofit BMP. Note that the insert
includes an overflow area above the filter bag when the runoff rate is greater than can pass
through the filter bag.
MnDOT has retrofitted storm drains in St. Cloud, MN with Geotextile Marathon filters and the
Imbiber Beads Imbicator and has found that these filters will capture 100% of trash and cigarette
butts, as well as most sediment and numerous other pollutants. The Imbicator filters organic
chemicals including gasoline, fuel oil, chlorinated solvents, and other aromatic solvents from
stormwater and changes color to indicate when the filter needs to be replaced. The filter can
remove a total of 2½ gallons of oil before needing replacement.
This type of retrofit BMP could be installed in urban areas that discharge stormwater directly to
Lake Superior or its tributary creeks and rivers, particularly high use areas. Potential retrofit
locations include Canal Park in Duluth, downtown Duluth, the cities of Two Harbors, Silver Bay,
Grand Marais and other developments that collect stormwater runoff into storm sewers and
discharge it directly to sensitive waters. Because there is a limited number of these urban storm
drain systems along the Highway 61 corridor, application of this retrofit BMP could be feasible
and manageable in key locations from an ongoing maintenance perspective.
2)b) Conduit Inlet and/or Outlet Filters

Contaminants from urban
and rural stormwater
runoff can include
various types of trash and
materials that have a
biological oxygen
demand when they
decompose. Culvert inlet
and outlet filters can be
installed at road crossings
of creeks and smaller
drainageways to collect
these types of pollutants.
Figure 11 shows one such
filter for the outlet of a
stormwater conduit.
Periodic clean out is an
important requirement for Figure 11. Stormwater Outlet Filter
this type of practice.
Recall the 3 key natural characteristics of the North Shore identified earlier in this report:
2) the geology involves relatively thin topsoil over infertile subsoils with high clay and/or
gravel content, and exposed bedrock in many locations; and
19
These characteristics make revegetation after disturbance of existing vegetation or natural
armoring of drainageways quite challenging, but also very important for water quality protection
and restoration in the Highway 61 corridor along the North Shore of Lake Superior. Accelerated
revegetation can be a retrofit BMP, as well as a new construction BMP.
Maintenance and improvement of transportation infrastructure is a very important yet

challenging activity along the North Shore, because it involves extensive surface drainage
systems that necessarily encounter the above 3 key natural characteristics of the area. Simple
clean-out of road ditches (including city, township, county and state roads) can be a significant
source of erosion, suspended solids and sedimentation in North Shore runoff conveyance
systems that empty into high value creeks and rivers that flow to Lake Superior. Ditch cleaning
typically involves scraping and regrading ditches to transport water away from roads and protect
the road embankment from overtopping, erosion and/or a saturated subgrade. Road ditches in the
Highway 61 corridor are typically excavated into infertile subsoils or bedrock, which is re-
exposed during clean-out. Figure 12 shows an example road ditch clean-out excavated into a
clay, glacial till subsoil. Although these can be challenging situations for reestablishment of
vegetation, there are many products, such as erosion control blankets, in use today that can
facilitate reestablishment of vegetation in these situations. In addition, relatively new practices
have been demonstrated in the Highway 61 corridor along the North Shore, including compost
blankets, compost logs and compost grout, to facilitate accelerated revegetation.
Figure 12. Cleaned Road Ditch, E. Shilhon Road, Lake County, near Highway 61
3)a) Erosion Control Blankets

Erosion control blankets are used quite extensively statewide for erosion control and revegetation
on steep, disturbed slopes. Within the Highway 61 corridor, there are many applications for
various types to erosion control blankets. MnDOT Standard Specifications for Construction,
2005 Edition (http://www.dot.state.mn.us/tecsup/spec/2005/toc.pdf) includes a wide variety of
erosion control blankets for various applications within Specification 3885. Following are key
summary information from Specification 3885.
20
MnDOT Specification 3885 – Erosion Control Blankets
Category Material Types Service Life Use
00 Wood Cellulose 1S, NT, RD 6-8 weeks Flat areas, mowed areas
0 Wood Fiber 0S, RD 6-8 weeks Flat areas, mowed areas
1 Straw RD 1S, or Wood Fiber 6-8 weeks Flat areas, shoulder drain outlets,
RD 1S roadway shoulders, and lawns.
2 Straw 1S, or Wood Fiber One Season Slopes 1v:3h to 1v:2h less than 15 m
1S (50 feet) long, ditches with gradients of
2 percent or less, flow velocities less
than 1.0 m/second (3.5 feet/sec.).
3 Straw 2S, or Wood Fiber 2S One Season Slopes 1v:3h to 1v:2h more than 15 m
(50 feet) long, ditches with gradients of
3 percent or less, flow velocities less
than 1.4 m/second (4.5 feet/sec.), flow
depth 50 mm (2 inches) or less.
4 Straw/Coconut 2S, or Semi- Slopes1v:2h and steeper, ditches with
Wood Fiber HV 2S permanent gradients of 4 percent or less, flow
velocities less than 1.7 m/sec.
(5.5 feet/sec.), flow depth 75 mm
(3 inches) or less.
5 Straw/Coconut 2S Semi- Ditch bottoms with gradients of
permanent 5 percent and less, flow velocities less
than 1.8 m/sec. (6 feet/sec.), and under
100 mm (4 inches) flow depth, water
course banks within the normal flow
elevation.
6 Straw/Coconut 3S, or Wood Permanent Ditch bottoms with gradients of 6
Fiber 3S percent and less, flow velocities less
than 2 m/sec. (6.5 feet/sec.), and under
150 mm (6 inches) flow depth.
7 Coconut 3S, or Wood Fiber Permanent Ditch bottoms with gradients of
3S 7 percent and less, flow velocities less
than 2.1 m/sec. (7 feet/sec.), and under
150 mm (6 inches) flow depth.
Material Type Abbreviations:
0S – No netting, stitching only
1S – Netting on one side
2S – Netting on two sides
3S – More than 2 nettings forming a three dimensional matrix
RD – Rapidly degradable netting and stitching
NT – No thread/stitching
HV – High velocity
21
3)b) Compost Blankets
The use of compost for various types of erosion control and accelerated revegetation practices
has advanced substantially in recent years. Compost has several key characteristics that are
substantially beneficial for accelerated revegetation of disturbed areas along the North Shore that
have little topsoil, relatively infertile subsoils and/or exposed bedrock. Compost provides an
excellent seed bed for accelerated revegetation. Compost can retain up to several times its weight
in water, helping to eliminate runoff from frequent small rainfall events and biotreat the first
flush of runoff from all rainfall events. The organic content of compost retains moisture for
extended periods to help accelerate revegetation. Compost can also absorb and biotreat a number
of pollutants, including those associated with road and parking area runoff.
In 2003, MnDOT, in
coordination with the
Minnesota Erosion Control
Association, other state and
local government units and
the University of
Minnesota, School of
Landscape Architecture,
conducted a demonstration
project along a 3-mile
length of Highway 61 near
the Fall River in Cook
County titled Applying
Natural Restoration
Techniques to Slope
Restoration. This project
was funded in part by the
Great Lakes Erosion and
Sediment Control Task
Force of the Great Lakes Figure 13. Compost Blanket, Highway 61, Cook Co. (2003)
Commission.
This natural restoration techniques demonstration project utilized composted leaves and grass
clippings in several ways, as well as direct-seeded woody shrubs, to accelerate revegetation of
road ditches along an upgraded portion of Highway 61. Compost blankets were one of the BMPs
demonstrated, along with other applications of compost. Compost blankets consisted of a layer
of compost several inches thick blown onto finish graded road ditches where very little topsoil
was available, the soil was very rocky and/or the road ditches were cut into bedrock. Two
different fertilizers were used, at different rates, including an organic-based, slow release mix. A
native seed mix and fertilizer was injected into the compost at the time of application. Figure 13
and Figure 14 show applications of compost blankets in two different settings along the
demonstration reach.
The results of this demonstration project were very favorable. Although the compost application
was conducted in October 2003, the compost blanket and other compost BMPs held up well until
22
and after vegetation was
established in 2004. A test
area on a steep side slope of
the road embankment
demonstrated faster and
thicker revegetation than an
adjacent area using topsoil
alone, without a compost
blanket. Note that Figure 8
above shows a summer
2006 photo of one of the
road ditch areas along
Highway 61 where a
compost blanket and other
compost BMPs were
utilized to accelerate
revegetation.
Figure 14. Compost Blanket, Highway 61, Cook Co. (2003)
3c) Compost Logs

Compost logs can be used
in various applications,
including ditch check dams
and chevrons, as previously
discussed. Figure 2 above
shows compost logs used as
check dams in a steep
drainageway in the Twin
Cities area, while Figures 3,
8 and 13 show, or include,
compost log check dams
and a chevron in road
ditches along Highway 61
in Cook County. Figure 15
shows a drainage way
along the North Shore Trail
in the Silver Cliff Tunnel
area, where compost Figure 15. Compost Logs and Blanket at Silver Cliff (2006)
biologs were used in
conjunction with a compost blanket to accelerate revegetation and successfully prevent erosion,
in a very aesthetically pleasing setting.
23
3d) Compost Grout
Another application of
compost is as grout, such as
on rock slopes, in riprap
and in gabion baskets.
Compost grout provides a
medium for water retention,
growth and sustainability of
vegetation and attendant
runoff reduction and water
quality improvement (as
well as aesthetic
enhancement). Figure 16
shows an application of
compost grout on a steep
rock side slope of a
Highway 61 embankment
in Cook County. This was
another component of the
2003 demonstration project
in Cook County. Note that
the compost was blown into
the voids between rocks.
This application has held Figure 16. Compost Grout of Rock Side Slope (2003)
up well.
Another potential
application of compost
grout is incorporation into
rock-filled gabion baskets,
such as shown in Figure 17.
The location of this gabion
basket retaining wall is on
the the Gitchi Gammi Bike
Trail along the North Shore
of Lake Superior. Because
this site is located at the
head of a small ravine,
where there is concentrated
runoff from Highway 61,
there is potential for
erosion of sediment into
and through the gabion
baskets. Compost grout in Figure 17. Compost Grout, Potential Application (2006)
this application could help
retain sediments, reduce runoff and improve the aesthetics of the site.
24
The U.S. Composting Council created the Seal of Testing Assurance (STA) Program for
compost in 2000, in conjunction with Test Methods for the Examination of Composting and
Compost (TMECC). The test methods include physical, chemical and biological tests for
nitrogren (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), heavy metals, E.coli, salmonella, and other
compost characteristics and potential contaminants. Compost that meets the associated standards
is awarded the Seal of Testing Assurance. When the Great Lakes Commission grant project
Applying Natural Restoration Techniques to Slope Restoration was implemented in 2003,
compost was trucked from the Twin Cities to the North Shore to ensure adequate quantity and
quality. Since that time, the Western Lake Superior Sanitary District (WLSSD) has become
involved with the STA Program and the production of certified compost. As the application of
compost for erosion control, bioretention and accelerated revegetation grows in popularity, it is
expected that additional certified compost sources may emerge in the Highway 61 corridor along
the North Shore of Lake Superior.
POTENTIAL RETROFIT LOCATIONS

Potential retrofit opportunities and locations were identified via analysis of the information
sources outlined above and field investigations during May 2006 through June 2007. These
analyses and investigations were conducted by BWSR, in cooperation with MnDOT, MPCA,
DNR, and SWCD staff within the Highway 61 corridor along the North Shore to identify
drainage situations and locations presenting opportunities for runoff energy dissipation, settling,
infiltration and/or biotreatment prior to discharge into North Shore streams and Lake Superior.
Appendix C – Potential Retrofit Sites in the Highway 61 Corridor – North Shore Retrofit
Identification Project includes a list of potential retrofit locations along the North Shore and the
Highway 61 corridor from Duluth to northeast of Grand Marias and associated maps to help
identify these locations. A number of locations for potential retrofits were identified in each of
the three counties in the project area. This list identifies retrofit types to fit the need of the
particular water quality problem and/or opportunity at each specific location. Generally, the
potential retrofits identified are relatively low-cost practices that could be implemented in
conjunction with maintenance and improvement of existing infrastructure. Many of these
practices could also be utilized as new construction BMPs.
OVERVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER PERMIT REQUIREMENTS

The U.S. EPA Nonpoint Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) construction
stormwater management requirements are administered by the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency. Owners and operators of construction activity disturbing 1 acre or more of land need to
obtain an NPDES/SDS stormwater permit. Owners and operators of construction activity
disturbing less than 1 acre, but that are within a larger common plan of development or sale that
disturbs 1 acre or more, must also obtain permit coverage. Applicable guidance and the permit
form can be found at: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/stormwater/index.html. An updated
permit took effect on August 1, 2008.
The Construction Stormwater Permit requires the development and implementation of a

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). All exposed areas must be stabilized no later
than 14 days after construction activity in that portion of the site where work has temporarily of
permanently ceased. A variety of BMPs are recommended for temporary and final stabilization,
25
including specific design, inspection and maintenance requirements. Final stabilization includes
establishing a uniform perennial vegetative cover over 70% of pervious surface areas. Additional
BMPs and enhanced runoff controls are required for discharges to special waters, which include
trout streams and Lake Superior. A special waters search tool is available at:
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/stormwater/stormwater-c.html#specialwaters. There are
specific requirements for projects located within 1 mile of, and have stormwater runoff to,
impaired waters, where the identified pollutant(s) or stressor(s) are phosphorus, turbidity,
dissolved oxygen, or biotic impairment. A list of impaired waters is available at:
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/tmdl.
Retrofit BMPs can be part of a SWPPP for a project that involves 1 acre or more of soil
disturbance within existing development, such as improvement of transportation and/or
stormwater management infrastructure. The updated Construction Stormwater Permit
requirements include an applicable training requirement for individuals who prepare SWPPPs,
oversee implementation of SWPPPs and perform inspections required by the permit, or perform
or supervise the installation, maintenance or repair of project BMPs. As indicated previously in
this report, many of the BMPs recommended by this retrofit identification project are applicable
for both existing and new development in the North Shore area of Lake Superior.
CONCLUSIONS
The Highway 61 corridor along the North Shore of Lake Superior has 3 key natural
characteristics, and land use characteristics along Lake Superior, that necessitate extra attention
to protect water resources. These characteristics were driving forces for this project. Applicable
demonstration projects in the North Shore area, and elsewhere in Minnesota, were sources of
increasing knowledge about applicable BMPs for the Highway 61 corridor along the North
Shore. This study and report investigated applicable retrofit BMP types, as well as locations
within the Highway 61 corridor along the North Shore having opportunities for implementation
of these BMPs.
Three categories of applicable retrofit BMPs were identified, including:

3) Accelerated Revegetation.
Within these general categories are a number of specific BMPs that are recommended. Some of
these are familiar BMPs that have application as retrofits during repair and improvement of
transportation infrastructure and stormwater conveyance systems. The recommended BMPs that
are relatively new to the area include various bioretention practices, storm drain inlet filters and
various uses of compost for accelerated revegetation and erosion control. Projects to date along
the North Shore that have demonstrated the use of compost for these purposes have been very
successful.
It is recommended that township, county and state transportation authorities, as well as cities,
other government units and private individuals, pursue opportunities for implementation of
retrofit BMPs to protect and restore the sensitive water quality of the unique North Shore and
Lake Superior.
26
Appendix A
Summary of Pertinent Water Quality and Related Information for North Shore Rivers and Creeks
Fish Passage Active

Local Concerns County / State Work
Impaired Use (303 d Problems Watershed Recent Assessment /
River or Creek and Planned for Hwy. 61
list) – TMDL timeline (MN DNR Group or Trend (MPCA 2002)
Recommendations or Adjacent
Survey 2004) Project
Lester River Aquatic life/turbidity SWCD • NPS pollution Watershed Forest -Lester River bridge
– 2006 - 2011 forest and Stewardship restoration 2009
stewardship eutrophication Project – South -Condos being built on
project • ↓ water quality St. Louis SWCD stream edge just
since 1970s plan upstream of 61
Talmadge Aquatic life/Low Significant • ↑ NPS pollution Watershed Forest McQuade harbor
River oxygen & Turbidity – impediment – and Stewardship project nearby on
2005 - 2011 control eutrophication Project – South Scenic Hwy 61 (will
structures below • ↓ water quality St. Louis SWCD increase impervious
culvert most since 1970s plan surface at this
significant • rainbow trout location)
barrier population
remaining stable
French River Aquatic life/turbidity • ↑ NPS pollution Watershed Forest
– 2005 - 2011 and Stewardship
eutrophication Project – South
• ↓ water quality St. Louis SWCD
since 1970s plan
Schmidt • ↑ NPS pollution
Creek and
eutrophication
• ↓ water quality
since 1970s
Sucker River Aquatic life/turbidity Significant Watershed • ↑ NPS pollution Watershed Forest
2015 - 2020 impediment – project and Stewardship
maintenance of completed eutrophication Project – South
baffle system in in 2006 • ↓ water quality St. Louis SWCD
culvert would since 1970s plan
improve fish • rainbow trout
passage population
remaining stable
1
Appendix A
Fish Passage Active
Knife River Aquatic life/ pH and Lots of • ↑ NPS pollution Watershed Forest Hawk Hill Road just
turbidity forest and Stewardship out of Knife River –
Aquatic stewardship eutrophication Project – South Cross pipe with
consumption/mercury planning in • ↓ water quality St. Louis and potential for doing
in water column watershed, since 1970s Lake SWCD sediment ponds –
2002-2007 TMDL plans excavators will be
underway there Summer 2007
Skunk Creek Two • ↓ water quality Two Harbors Br under DM&IRR to
Harbors, since 1970s Stormwater .6 mi. No, in Two
Lake Co. Management Plan Harbors, 2007
and SWCD intent to address
doing streambank
various erosion with GLC
projects grant (done).
Lake SWCD
High Priority
Erosion and
Sedimentation
area
Flood Bay,
unnamed
Creek
Stewart River • ↓ water quality Lake SWCD Highway
since 1970s High Priority reconstruction Stewart
Erosion and River to Silver Cliff -
Sedimentation 2021
area
Silver Creek Significant • ↓ water quality
impediment – since 1970s
low water depth
and velocity
barriers
Gooseberry • ↓ water quality .4 Mi S of State Park
since 1970s RD to CSAH 5 LT,
2
Appendix A
Fish Passage Active
River Thick overlay 2009
Split Rock • ↓ water quality Reconstructions: ¼
River since 1970s Mi. N. of Split Rock
R. to Chapins, Bridge
2010, Gooseberry to ¼
mile north of Split
Rock 2018.
Beaver River Aquatic life/ pH and • ↓ water quality Beaver Bay Possibly constructing
turbidity, since 1970s Comprehensive new Co. Road on Co.
Aquatic Land Use Plan – Road 4 - 1000’ off
consumption/mercury clarify vegetation Hwy 61(with Scenic
in water column – management Byways grant, date
2005 - 2011 requirements; unknown)
Lake SWCD Reconstruction Beaver
High Priority Bay to Silver Bay
Erosion and 2015
Sedimentation
area (East
Branch)
Baptism River • ↓ water quality Paint bridge 2009;
since 1970s potentially updating
rest area and parking
lot 2016
Manitou • ↓ water quality New concrete culverts
River since 1970s along Co. Rd 6, 2007;
Co. Rd. 6 reclaim and
overlay, reshoulder
2007; Reconstruction -
3.3 mi. North of Little
Marais to 1.75 mi.
north of Little Marais
2020
Caribou River • ↓ water quality Reconstruction - 1.75
since 1970s Mi. north of Little
3
Appendix A
Fish Passage Active
Marais to Cook county
line 2022;
reconstruction -
county line to 4.1 mi.
north of county line
2024
Cross River • ↓ water quality Reconstruction 4.1
since 1970s miles north of county
line to Schroeder
Bridge #6202 2020;
Cross River Wayside
rest 2024
Temperance • ↓ water quality Reconstruction -
River since 1970s Schroeder to Tofte and
Temperance River
bridge 2021; RC in
Tofte 2017
Onion River Significant • ↓ water quality Reconstruction at
impediment - since 1970s Onion River to Co.
low water depth Rd. 34, two bridges,
and velocity and Onion River
barriers, low Pedestrian/Bike Trail,
priority due to MNDOT 2009
upstream habitat
Poplar River Aquatic life/ pH and TMDL • ↓ water quality Reconstruction Co.
turbidity, underway, since 1970s Rd. 34 to CSAH 4
Aquatic active • rainbow trout 2018; CSAH 4 to 1 mi.
consumption/mercury group juvenile N. of Co. Rd 41 2023;
in water column – population Reconstruct CSAH 4 1
2005 - 2011 declining (since ½ mile up from 61 to
1970s) end at Ski Hill 2008
Cascade River • ↓ water quality Reconstruction 1 mi.
since 1970s N. of Co. Rd. 41 to
Cascade River 2022;
4
Appendix A
Fish Passage Active
Extend Spruce Creek
Bridge #8292 2021;
Widen Cascade River
Bridge #5132 2021
Village Ditch Grand Marais Reconstruct CSAH 7
(east of Grand Stormwater through Grand
Marais) Mgmt. Plan 2001/ Marais, new storm
Cook SWCD sewer ,curb and gutter
Workplan ,sidewalk 2007
Devil Track Significant • ↓ water quality
River impediment, since 1970s
highest priority
Kimball • ↓ water quality
Creek since 1970s
Kadunce • ↓ water quality
River since 1970s
Flute Reed Active • ↓ water quality Cook SWCD
River citizen since 1970s 2006 identified
group may erosion sources
form
nonprofit
Brule River
Reservation
River
Pigeon River • ↓ water quality Painting Bridge
since 1970s MNDOT 2007; Grand
Portage State Park and
MN DOT 2008–
Creation of Pigeon
River Rest area
(directly next to
Pigeon River)
5
Appendix B
Compilation of Local Government Plans Relevant to the Highway 61 Corridor
Priority Concerns Action Items

Local Plan Identified concerns Identified Priorities All Streams in Impaired Erosion Control/ Stormwater Management
corridor Streams
St. Louis 1. Protect and restore • Lester • Lester 1.minimum shore impact zone is 50 feet, 75 feet for
County Water Shore Impact Zone • Talmadge River trout streams, plus possible additional standards re:
Plan 2001 2. Trout streams • French • Talmadge fertilizers, pesticides, and other issues that would
3. Rivers • Schmidt River result in increased nonpoint pollution to the lake or
4. BMP education • Sucker • French river.
5. Storm Water • Knife River 2. wetland protection levels the highest according to
Management • Sucker the county wetland plan, only residential development
6. Erosion Control Plans River allowed within 300 feet of a trout stream, special bluff
• Knife standards continue as outlined in county zoning
River ordinances, trout stream shore impact zones should
have priority for erosion control and revegetation
efforts. The minimum shore impact zone for trout
streams will be 75 feet from the stream bank.
3. if no special plan, then may have bluff standards
based on soil conditions and lot area standards
reflective of the area
4. make information available to every lake and river
property owner
5. Stormwater mgmt. plans should be developed in
all communities with direct discharge into trout
streams or other high quality waters – based on
specific minor watershed
6. communities with above average erosion control
issues may develop an erosion control ordinance.
SWCD is clearinghouse
1
Compilation of Local Government Plans Relevant to the Highway 61 Corridor – North Shore Retrofit Identification Project

corridor Streams
City of Duluth • Potential subdivision • Amity Creek • Amity
development development (by • Lester River Creek
plans (62nd Ave. John Hovland) on • Lester
East to Moose Mountain River
Lakewood (off Lester River
Township) Road) in
commercially zoned
area
2

corridor Streams
City of Duluth • impacts of storm • Develop and • Amity Creek • Amity • Provide information and education to the public
Stormwater water discharges on implement a public • Lester River Creek about pollution
Pollution water bodies participation program • Lester • Provide opportunity for public involvement and
Prevention • Illicit discharge to assist in the River feedback
Program detection and implementation of the • Identify and eliminate illicit connections
2006 elimination surface water • Develop construction controls to prevent
• Construction site management plan erosion and pollution
storm water runoff • Develop and • Development of post construction controls
control implement a program • Internal good housekeeping measure for the
• Post-construction that includes city
site storm water ordinances prohibiting
management in new illicit sewer Go to:
development and connections or
redevelopment discharges (including http://www.lakesuperiorstreams.org/stormwater/duluth
dumping), creates /stormwater_plan.html#PhaseII
sewer maps, and offers
public education on
the hazards of illicit
discharges
• Develop, implement,
and enforce a program
to reduce storm water
runoff from
construction activities
on land disturbances of
or more acres
• Develop, implement,
and enforce a program
that addresses storm
water runoff from new
development and
redevelopment,
generally using
structural and
nonstructural BMPs
3

corridor Streams
South St. Louis • Lake and stream • Lester • Lester • Provide technical, educational, and financial
SWCD Annual protection • Talmadge River assistance to install BMPs
Plan 2006 • Combined impacts of • French • Talmadge • Provide assistance for Lake Superior shoreline
development • Schmidt River erosion problems
• Outreach and • Sucker • French • Review DNR water permits and provide input to
education • Knife River help limit negative problems
• Forestry • Sucker • Work with St. Louis County on lake classification
• Ground Water River and protection
• Protection of • Knife • Remain member of Lake Superior Basin PWG to
Community and River ensure the Basin Plan is implemented
Natural Resources • Implement portions of St. Louis Co. Water Plan
• Agricultural • Work on watershed protection and restoration
• Wildlife management projects (Miller Creek, Knife River and Sucker
River)
• Provide more erosion and sediment control
leadership, resources, training
• Become a resource for developers early in
process, illustrating how natural resource
protection is sustainable for business
• Become a GIS center for community
• Continue development of Low Impact
Development Assistance Program or
conservation site design
• Restore degraded wetlands and wetland
function loss
• Continued watershed-based forest stewardship
projects (Knife, Sucker, French, Talmadge, and
Lester projects)
4

corridor Streams
Lakewood Actual Developments • Lester River • Lester ”Use BMPS described in North Shore Management
Township – • Plumbing shop and • Talmadge River Plan”, such as:
upcoming plans storage facility being River • Talmadge • Utilize BMPs to control post-development
for built now River stormwater runoff quantity and quality
development in • Commercial • Erosion and Sediment Control Plans for
the corridor communication tower disturbances exceeding 1,000 sq. ft., any
(conversation going in now shoreland alteration within 50 cubic yards
with Zoning within structure setback area.
Administrator • Encourage nodal development
Brennan Mears
7/06)
5

corridor Streams
Duluth • Deficiencies in the • Protecting natural • Sucker River • Knife • Identify and prioritize important habitat and
Township conditional use resources • Little Knife River natural areas
Comprehensive permit process • Maintaining rural River • Talmadge • Limit or redirect development that puts at risk the
Lane Use Plan • Potential character • Knife River River carrying capacity of land or watersheds
2002 development • Balancing the • West Branch • French • Control the effects of development to minimize
pressure increases protection of Knife River River the risk of water contamination of Lake Superior
resulting from the individual property • Stanley and it’s tributaries.
proposed sewer line rights with Creek • Participate in planning with the county highway
in the North Shore community needs • Little Sucker department in developing road standards that are
corridor (10.4% • Effects on property River in keeping with the rural character of the
population increase taxes • French River community
since 1990 vs. 1.2% • Talmadge • Preserve the functional integrity of all natural
during previous River drainage courses from impacts due to increased
decade)
• Schmidt storm water runoff
Creek • Identify and preserve all significant wetland
areas vital to the protection of fisheries and
wildlife, and to minimize flooding
• Prevent development along Lake Superior
which causes erosion or endangers water
quality
• Promote use of site designs in the North Shore
corridor that mitigate storm water on site,
buffer sensitive areas, limit clearing, and
preserve natural features
• Encourage participation by the Township in the
larger planning efforts for North Shore corridor
activities.
• Establish a threshold for new impervious surfaces
within sensitive areas, and allow higher thresholds
conditional on acquiring conservation easements
within the designated area.
6

corridor Streams
Two Harbors Actual Developments • Skunk Creek
development • Blue Waters Resort • Pete’s Creek
plans (from (Burlington Bay area) • Golf Course
ARDC, Two – 6 condos, pool Creek
Harbors building and office • 3rd street
planner, 2006) building, phased in storm sewer
over 10-12 years • 6th street
• Sale of golf course storm sewer
and development in • arena
NE corner for drainage
housing
• Harbor Hills
• Hidden Springs (on
Skunk Creek) – 18
housing units and 24
townhomes
• HRA housing project
in Segog area
• Lighthouse Point-
zoned parks and rec,
conditional use
permit for
hotel/restaurant
complex on lake
7

corridor Streams
Two Harbors • Clay soils with high • Skunk Creek • Evaluate existing and 20 year development
Stormwater potential for runoff • Pete’s Creek plans for contributions to storm water runoff
Mgmt. Plan • 1.5-23% slopes • Golf Course • City and County develop one Stormwater
2001 • capacity of current Creek management ordinance (e.g., Dane Co. WI)
system is for 10-25 • 3rd street • Street sweeping year round
year storm storm sewer • Creek cleaning
• Increasing • 6th street • Public education, yard waste pick-up
development in storm sewer • Maintenance of culverts, catch-basins, ditches,
watersheds • arena streets
drainage • Repair Bank Erosion: Skunk Creek RR Tracks
(GLC grant?)
• Updates to Skunk Creek and channel system to
reduce flooding (increase culvert size and
widening creek channels) (pp. 11-12)
• Increase Segog ditch and culverts to 100 year
event capacity
• Possible re-routing of Segog ‘creek’ to discharge
directly to Lake Superior
• Proposed detention ponds
• Run-off diversions (Segog area & creek to Skunk
creek)
8

corridor Streams
Lake County • Increased • Erosion control on • Knife River • Knife • Natural Resources education (demonstration
Water development construction sites, • Stewart River (in forest project, property owner’s resource
Management pressures road management, River both Lake guide, Earthwork contractor’s workshop
Plan 2006 – • Enforcement of cumulative impacts, • Silver Creek and St. • Work with cities, townships and county on
2015 existing land use shoreline erosion • Gooseberry Louis) erosion and sediment control measures
laws control River • Beaver • Assist Two Harbors in implementing the Storm
• Stormwater • Use of BMPs in • Skunk Creek River Water Management Plan
management development • Split Rock • Implement components of the Lake Superior
• Wastewater activities and forest River Basin Plan that are approved locally
management (non- mgmt. Activities • Beaver River • Field inspect construction sites for compliance
conforming ISTS, • Stormwater • Baptism with erosion and storm water management
surface and GW management River controls
contamination, • Natural resources • Manitou • Work with city, township and county
drinking water education on River departments to ensure they are using sound
quality) water/land issues • Caribou erosion control measures
• Lake and stream • Support of TMDL River • Review city and county ordinances for
water quality, water research project adequate soil erosion and storm water
quantity and efforts on north shore management provisions and other water
biological integrity streams quality provisions
• Encourage the development of a set of
guidelines to evaluate cumulative impacts of
development on water resources
• Develop a fund to assist local units of
government and/or organizations with water
quality projects related to water plan priorities
• Document existing accomplishment (e-LINK)
9

corridor Streams
Lake County • Education and • Knife River • Knife • Education programs, classroom presentations,
SWCD Annual Information • Stewart River (in regional events, featured articles and news
Work Plan • Agriculture River both Lake releases, Snow Rules and Rain Gauge programs
2006 • Forestry • Silver Creek and St. • Promote knowledge and use of grazing technology
• Natural resources • Gooseberry Louis) • Forest management projects
planning River • Beaver • Assist in development of Natural Resources
• Water quality • Skunk Creek River Management Plans
• Split Rock • Work cooperatively with Lake County Planning
River and LGUs, and LASWCDs, SRF JPB, RC & D
• Beaver River Council, LS Basin project
• Baptism • Wetland Conservation Act
River • Implement Lake Co. Water Plan
• Manitou -field inspect construction sites for erosion and
River sediment control measures
• Caribou -assist Planning & Zoning Dept. and Planning
River Commission on Land Use Issues
-meet with townships to review water quality
issues
• High priority erosion and sediment areas
include roadside erosion (county, township, and
Highway 61)
10

corridor Streams
Cook County • Improve the water • Cross River • Poplar • Provide support to forestry specialist to identify
SWCD quality of • Temperance River and contact landowners in Flute Reed watershed
Annual Work degraded/impaired River re: erosion sources.
Plan 2006 waters • Onion River • Complete site review of property and propose land
• Work toward goal of • Poplar River management project to landowners.
effective stormwater • Cascade • Provide technical assistance and cost share for
management as River erosion control and septic upgrade projects.
standard practice in • Devil Track • Track improvements on database.
all county reviewed River • Training on construction site storm water
development • Kimball pollution prevention plans and NPDES;
proposals. Creek technical assistance.
• Cost share • Kadunce • Write Natural Resource Property Owner’s Guide
implementation for River for landowners, realtors and regulators.
erosion control • Flute Reed • WQ sampling on Lake Superior beaches, inland
River lakes, and analysis, interpretation and community
• Brule River outreach re: results.
• Reservation • GIS analysis and strategy paper for restoration and
River protection.
• Pigeon River • Flute Reed River and Colville Creek watershed
projects.
11

corridor Streams
Cook County • Improve the quality of • Cross River Poplar River • Complete WQ monitoring on Poplar River
Local Water degraded/impaired • Temperance • Work with BWSR and County WCA tech. panel
Management waters River to write protocol and establish plan for enforcing
Plan – 2006 • Improve wetland • Onion River WCA.
Proposed management and focus • Poplar River • Establish prioritized list of waters recommended
Initiatives on greater protection • Cascade for volunteer monitoring, distribute list to
(from 2006 – of wetland values and River landowners, contact and instruct volunteers.
2012) functions • Devil Track • Establish baseline or trend data for several county
• Increase water quality River inland lakes.
monitoring of near • Kimball • Meet with county highway engineer and staff to
shore and inland lake Creek write plans and procedures to implement 13
waters, especially • Kadunce action items*(see appendix)
those with River • Develop a media strategy focused on septic
development pressure, • Flute Reed system function and installation.
fisheries concerns and River
lakes used for drinking
• Brule River
water.
• Reservation
• Reduce undesirable
River
water quality impacts
• Pigeon River
associated with roads
and other land activity
managed and/or
approved by Cook Co.
• Develop septic system
management plan for
Cook County that
eliminates sewage
impacts to water
quality.
• Effective stormwater
management as
standard practice in all
county reviewed
development
proposals.
12

corridor Streams
Grand Marais • Clay soils with high Recommendations not yet completed
Stormwater potential for runoff (in priority order)
Management • 1.5-23% slopes • #5 West Campground – Repair/ create proper
Plan • Capacity of current drainage
2001 system is for 25-year • Continue gauging streams and measuring rainfall
storm event • Continue sampling storm water runoff
• East Campground – ditching along northern
side, need to reevaluate with Hwy 61
improvements by MNDOT
• Pave side streets off 8th Ave. West
• Village Ditch – fix erosion east of 7th avenue E.
• Village ditch – up-size culvert beneath Co. Rd. 7
• Village ditch – repair erosion to S. Side at Hwy
61 crossing
• Village ditch – Gunflint/Creechville Road culvert
replacement at start of ditch
• Maintain stream channels, storm sewers, and
ditches
• Verify SWMM model calibration with new
data – updates to existing model expensive
• Install high capacity pump in City Hall pond
13

corridor Streams
North Shore • Coordination of flow All North Shore • Lester • Examination of important North Shore land use
Management of info from Studies to streams River issues, create workgroup and develop policy and
Plan LGUs • Talmadge model ordinance/suggestions
2004 • Maintain the natural River • Data collection and coordination (liaison between
character of the North • French LGUs)
Shore as much as River • Education and information distribution
possible and minimize • Sucker • Utilize BMPs to control post-development
soil erosion while River stormwater runoff quantity and quality
allowing for permitted • Knife • Erosion and Sediment Control Plans for
development River disturbances exceeding 1,000 sq. ft., any
• Beaver shoreland alteration within 50 cubic yards
River within structure setback area.
• Poplar • Encourage nodal development
River • Provides minimum standards for LGUs to adopt
which include:
-lot area and lot width
-structure setbacks
-highway access control
-building height
-lot coverage
-subdivision of property
- shoreland zoning standards
Lake Superior Emerging Local Issues: • Acknowledge and • • Integrate water resource protection programs into
Basin Plan • Increase in stream support the important local ordinances
2004 temperature role LGUs play in the • Provide technical assistance to local land use
• Development along protection of water authorities as needed
the North Shore resources • Develop strategies to maintain high quality or un-
• Paper companies • The maintenance and impacted or high resource value watersheds
and forestry protection of high • Identify high resource value watersheds
• Stability of quality watersheds • Reduce pollutant loadings
northeastern • Utilization of land use • Minimize changes in water quantity and peak
Minnesota’s and environmental discharge rates
resource based laws to protect water • Reduce temperature impacts to cold streams and
economy quality lakes
14

corridor Streams
• Directional drilling • Reduce storm water • Protect physical integrity of stream banks and
in Lake Superior impacts on lakes, shoreline areas
streams and wetlands • Meet Clean Water Act requirements to complete
• Develop restoration TMDLs
plans for TMDLs • Restore waters to state standards
• Develop management • Establish watershed or action plans to prevent
plans to maintain and future or continuing degradation of impaired
enhance threatened waters
basin waters • Prioritize sensitive watersheds through the
• Protect cold water watershed assessment process and knowledgeable
habitats on the North basin partners
Shore • Develop strategies to minimize impacts of future
• Watersheds will be the or expected development pressures
principal planning • Establish baseline data on priority watersheds
framework for water • Improve efficiency through collaboration and
resource management geographic targeting of scarce financial and
in the LS basin. human resources
• Use the MN CNP • Enhance cooperation between adjoining
Program as a jurisdictions and all levels of government
foundation for basin • Facilitate watershed specific partnerships
nonpoint pollution • Design watershed specific protection and
issues restoration policies and strategies
• Develop, promote, and • Use 53 NOAA/EPA management measure options
improve as performance standards
environmental • Help address conditions placed on federal
education in the LS approval of the coastal nonpoint program
basin
• Raise awareness of cause and effect
• Raise awareness of nonpoint source pollution
• Raise level of stewardship
• Foster coordination and cooperation between
government, nonprofit, and private sector
15
MNDOT 6-year 1. Onion River – 2009 • Onion River • Follow construction site stabilization schedule as
Plan / North North end of Tofte • Split Rock required by NPDES permit
Shore Plan (85.57- 88.99) River
2006 2. Split Rock River –
2010 (42.82 – 46.16)
Cook SWCD 2006 Annual Plan – Goal 5.1, Action Items (1 – 13)
1. Develop an annual road inspection process to review private roads in shoreland zones of lakes and rivers.
2. Improve platted road plan submissions and review suggested improvements; clearly describe, map/diagram the road surface material and
volume/quantity, subbase materials, specific shapes and finished grades of ditches and shoulders, sizes and flow calculations for culverts
that show relationship to the hydrology of the project area, etc. Require follow-up review with the developer/contractors on site while
projects are in building stage and at completion of project. (Planning & Zoning, Highway, SWCD)
3. Develop plat review process that includes analysis and assessment from hydrologic modeling software. Investigate tools available and
usefulness for cumulative effects analysis. (Water Advisory Committee, Water Mgmt. Plan)
4. Require use of forest road BMPs for all driveways and private roads of all types. (Planning & Zoning, Highway, SWCD)
5. Prepare and implement an approved erosion control plan for all new county road construction. (Highway)
6. Investigate and address underlying causes that lead to ditch scraping/cleanouts – e.g., too many fines in surfacing materials or excessive
road washouts/culvert failures. (Highway)
7. Require the use of coarse road surfacing materials on roads, driveways and access routes where ditches drain directly into surface waters.
(Planning & Zoning, Highway, SWCD)
8. Advocate for a comprehensive Cook County Road Plan. (Commissioners)
9. Reduce erosion and runoff impacts to lake waters at county managed boat landings. Work with DNR technical staff to improve
landings/accesses within 5 years.
10. Review current county operations and maintenance procedures related to pollution prevention, revise as necessary, and implement
procedures to reduce pollutant loading in surface run-off. (Highway)
11. Develop and implement run-off pollution controls for existing road systems to reduce pollutant concentrations and volumes. (Highway,
SWCD)
12. Establish county road system erosion control and runoff performance standards for county engineer and responsible staff. (Highway,
SWCD)
13. Meet with county highway engineer and staff to write plans and procedures to implement these action items.
16
Appendix C
Potential Retrofit Sites in the Highway 61 Corridor
Note: Numbers below correspond to locations on Appendix C Maps #1 – #5
Not identified on maps: Canal Park and downtown Duluth – Retrofit storm drains with filter
inserts, because there is high pedestrian and vehicular traffic in these areas, which drain
directly to the harbor and Lake Superior. Marathon Materials, Dandy Bag and Pig-Drain
Inserts are example manufacturers that make bags to filter litter (e.g. cigarette butts, food
wrappers, plastic bottles, etc.), oil and other pollutants from runoff entering storm drains.
Maintenance includes periodic replacement of insert bags, which can be done at a rate of
approximately 3 per hour. The Duluth Downtown Council Green Team is a potential project
partner.
1. McQuade Harbor – New parking and lake access area will create new impervious
surface. Promote infiltration practices and storm drain inlet filters.
2. Lakeview Castle Restaurant – has a lot of impervious surface in the parking area that
could be changed to pervious surface as a retrofit.
3. East Shilhon Road (GPS 300) – Retrofit for road ditch: seed, erosion control blanket and
fertilizer. Work with county highway department regarding future ditch cleaning,
maintenance and revegetation efforts directly after ditch cleaning.
4. Knife River within the Hwy. 61 corridor – Install swales with non-mow mix to be applied
in ditches. This would allow for bioswale / rain garden treatment before discharging to
the Knife River. Could install at all outlets to the river, of which there are several. SWCD
could provide scenarios for landowners.
5. Ditches in front of Two Harbors businesses (Pizza Hut, Subway, etc.) could have
bioswales and/or rain gardens for treatment of stormwater prior to discharge to Skunk
Creek. This could provide a more attractive frontage for the businesses, as well as
improve the quality of stormwater runoff.
Not identified on maps: Two Harbors storm drains – MNDOT and city could put urban
stormwater filters inside storm drain inlets to catch cigarette butts, trash, sediment, and
chemicals.
6. Unnamed creek just southwest of Flood Bay wayside. Recurring maintenance issue for
MNDOT – much debris in stream from old landfill upstream continues to work its way
downstream and has to be cleaned out periodically. Retrofit a low-flow bioreactor of
wood chips between pervious retaining walls to improve water quality and collect
sediment before it gets to the conduit under Hwy. 61. The bioreactor would be designed
to overtop during high flows. Flood Bay wetlands are some of the few coastal wetlands
along the North Shore.
1
Appendix C
7. East Beaver Bay – Construction of the Gitchi-Gami State Trail included the installation
of a gabion wall over a ravine. A retrofit here would be to blow seeded compost into
gabions to provide biotreatment of runoff from the new trail and Highway 61 prior to
entering the ravine.
Not identified on maps: Palisade area – Example of good BMPs installed in conjunction
with a new bridge project. Ditch drainage away from toe of embankment, animal crossing
space under bridge, velocity and erosion control before runoff in ditches enters the river.
Retrofits could include: downstream – rock swale; low-flow compost/wood chip check dam
filters or incorporate compost into rock spaces within road ditches. Currently there is some
road shoulder erosion caused by runoff from Highway 61. Retrofitting could involve
installing a turf reinforcement mat (TRM) or graded filter, possibly in conjunction with
chevrons at a low angle from the top of the embankment to the ditch bottom. (Noticed
equisetum – a plant indicator species of wet soils with extremely low fertility.)
8. MNDOT truck station at Palisade – will be closed within three years. A retrofit could be
reclamation of the parking lot. The parking lot drains to wetlands, which drain to Lake
Superior. There tends to be a lot of salt on the parking lot. A contaminated soil survey
likely should be completed there as well.
9. Caribou River – parking lot – could retrofit with a rain garden at the low corner of the lot
with designed outflow channel to the river. Also could add compost chevrons to road
banks adjacent to bridge to better control velocity down the embankment from the road
surface. Because there is a fish passage issue at this location, a fish ladder / pool and
riffle design could be added. On the downstream side of road embankment, could regrade
access road to drain away from the river to minimize thermal pollution and/or add
compost and vegetation to the stream bank riprap. Seed with vegetation appropriate to the
North Shore (e.g. Canada blue joint grass).
10. Sugar Loaf Road – just up from Hwy. 61 at culvert crossing. There has been increasing
development in this area for the past several years. It appears that the culverts may be
inadequate and should have better grade design, adjacent erosion control and outlet
energy dissipation to avoid erosion of the embankment, ditch bottoms and stream bottom.
Appropriately sized riprap with filter, ditch check dams, possibly enhanced with compost
mulch and seed are potential retrofits.
11. Temperance River Traders – Retrofits could include compost grouting and seeding of the
rocky ditch areas, with compost log check dams in the steeper areas of the ditch, for
water quality and aesthetic improvements. Shoulders along the trail could use a 1 ft. wide
gravel transition to the composted ditch to prevent erosion along the edges of the paved
trail.
12. Grand Marais – Residents reportedly lament excessive stormwater flow on streets and
associated flooding in some areas. Could construct a series of rain gardens at feasible and
2
Appendix C
strategic locations to reduce peak flows, provide biotreatment and increase infiltration
that can augment cool groundwater flows to streams. Good examples are Burnsville rain
gardens – see on web at:
http://www.landandwater.com/features/vol48no5/vol48no5_2.html
13. Creechville Road Stormwater Ponds (Grand Marais) – Retrofit could be to install a
(large) compost-covered gabion basket berm built through the middle of the stormwater
ponds (to make cells within the ponds). This could create smaller treatment cells and
more effective ponds. Potentially do some strategic replanting of trees to restore some
biodiversity around the site.
14. Ditch along Gunflint Trail just above water tower – Install 12-inch diameter compost logs
in areas with steep ditch grades, with the bottom elevation of the next upstream log
approximately at the top elevation of the adjacent downstream log, to serve as check
dams and for filtering stormwater.
15. Pincushion Mountain Parking Lot – Install flume at east end to prevent erosion. Install a
living engineered swale (turf reinforcement mat), then seed with tall-grass prairie mix,
which is better than rip-rap because roots reinforce the soil. Use signs to demonstrate
BMPs.
16. Cook County Highway Department – Mixed salt and gravel pile open, with runoff into
ditch – MNDOT and County share the facility. A retrofit could be an enclosed facility,
with runoff control and biotreatment.
17. Village Creek/ditch east of Grand Marais – Needs energy dissipation and streambank
stabilization downstream of Highway 61. Plans are reportedly already in process.
18. Devil Track River – Fish passage problem. DNR has identified this as a high priority.
There is also some natural bank erosion impacting mature trees on private property
immediately north of Hwy. 61. Streambank stabilization and fish passage design with
natural materials are potential retrofit BMPs.
19. County Road 14 dead end at Lake Superior – Abandoned asphalt road along Paradise
Beach should be removed, because it’s washing into Lake Superior bits at a time.
Stabilize with natural erosion resistant materials.
20. County Road 14 above Highway 61 – Typical ditch erosion from high water flows and/or
cleaning. It appears that the O/A horizons were scraped away. The potential retrofit here
is to replace topsoil, use erosion control blanket, seed and fertilizer, and possibly compost
logs or other erosion control practices, to accelerate ditch healing.
3
Appendix C
Not identified on maps: There are numerous small parking areas or pull-offs along Highway
61 and Scenic Highway 61 between Duluth and Grand Portage. Many of these parking areas
drain directly to rivers and/or directly to Lake Superior. Discharge into rain gardens, use of
storm drain filters and/or use of porous pavement to increase infiltration are potential retrofits
for these sites to protect and improve water quality. These sites also provide great
opportunity for demonstrations and public awareness of these types of BMPs.
Parking Area Highway 61 Primary When

Identification Milepost Number Users Open
Lester River Wayside 4.9 Fisherpersons, Tourists Year Round
Lester River Info Booth 5.0 Tourists Spring to Fall
Gitchi Gammi Park 5.1 Locals, Tourists Spring to Fall
Weigh Station 8.1 Truckers, MnDOT Year Round
Country View Way 8.5 Car Poolers Year Round
French River 11.7 Tourists Spring to Fall
Historical Marker
Knife River Rest Area 18.2 Tourists Spring to Fall
Floodbay Wayside 27.5 Tourists Spring to fall
Old Betty’s Pies 28.4 Customers Year Round
Parking Lot
Stewart River 28.5 Fisherpersons, Tourists Spring to Fall
Parking Lot
Silver Cliff Tunnel Service 30.3 Locals, Tourists, Year Round
Road MnDOT
Sliver Cliff Overlook 31.1 Tourists Year Round
Lafayette Tunnel 34.8 MnDOT Year Round
Service Road
Gooseberry Falls 39.3 Tourists Year Round
Visitor Center
Twin Points 42.0 Fisherpersons, Tourists Spring to Fall
Water Access
Split Rock River Wayside 43.3 Tourists Year Round
Split Rock Overlook 45.2 Tourists Year Round
Pine Bay Loop 48.2 Locals Year Round
Frontage Road
4
Appendix C
Parking Area Highway 61 Primary Users When Open

Identification Milepost Number
Beaver Bay Sports 52.1 Customers Year Round
Second Hand Rose 52.1 Customers Spring to Fall
Flea Market
Palisade Head 57.1 Tourist Year Round
Parking Lot
Baptism River Rest Area 58.6 Tourists & Truckers Year Round
Spirit of Gitche Gumee 63.6 Customers` Year Round
Parking Lot
Eagles Nest Gifts 65.2 Customers Year Round
Parking Lot
Caribou River Wayside 70.7 Tourists Year Round
Satellites Country Inn 72.0 School bus turn around Spring to Fall
Schroeder Bakery 78.9 Customers Year Round
Cross River Rest Area 78.9 Tourists Spring to Fall
Temperance River 80.1 Tourists Year Round
Wayside
Temperance River 80.2 Tourists Year Round
Wayside
CoHo Café Parking Lot 82.8 Customers Year Round
Tofte Rest Area 85.1 Tourists Year Round
Ray Berglund Memorial 86.5 Tourists Spring to Fall
Wayside
Rollin Creek Road 87.7 to 88.5 Locals Year Round
Clearview Frontage Road 91.8 to 92 Locals Year Round
Cascade Park Wayside 99.9 Tourists Year Round
Rex Green Historic Marker 104.1 Tourists Spring to Fall
Cut Face Rest Area 104.5 Tourists Spring to Fall
Downtown Grand Marias 109.2 to 110.2 Locals, Tourists Year Round
Kadunce River Wayside 118.9 Tourists Year Round
5
Appendix C
Parking Area Highway 61 Primary Users When Open

Identification Milepost
Rest Area 122.9 Tourists Spring to Fall
Overlook 137.1 Tourists Year Round
Grand Portage Bay 146.0 Tourists Spring to Fall
Rest Area & Info
Mt. Josephine Wayside 146.9 Tourists Year Round
Mt. Josephine 147.5 Tourists Spring to Fall
Scenic Overlook
Mt. Josephine 148.1 Tourists Year Round
Scenic Overlook
6
7
8
9
10
11

Highway 61 Stormwater Natural Drainage and Retrofit Identification Project (306-10-07)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Highway 61 Stormwater Natural Drainage and Retrofit Identification Project (306-10-07)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Minnesota’s Lake Superior Coastal Program

Highway 61 Stormwater Natural Drainage

Prepared by the Minnesota Board of Soil and Water Resources

Julie A. McDonnell, Project Specialist, BWSR

Al Kean, Chief Engineer, BWSR

Project No. 306-10-07

Contract No. A78906

Recommended retrofit BMPs include:

Figure Number and Title Page

Figure 1. North Shore Retrofit Identification Project Area

INFORMATION SOURCES AND SUMMARIES

Appendix B is a Compilation of Local Government Plans Relevant to the Highway 61 Corridor –

RECOMMENDED RETROFIT PRACTICES

1) Enhanced Runoff Velocity Control, Detention and Biotreatment

2) Stormwater Inlet and Culvert Filters

Descriptions of Applicable Retrofit BMPs

Biotreatment BMPs can include:

1)a) Check Dams

Biolog check dams (see

1)b) Runoff Diversion Chevrons

1)c) Rain Gardens and Bioswales (Bioretention)

Key characteristics of bioretention practices include:

Treating the first flush

2) Storm Drain Inlet and Culvert Filters

2)a) Storm Drain Inlet Filters / Inserts

2)b) Conduit Inlet and/or Outlet Filters

Maintenance and improvement of transportation infrastructure is a very important yet

3)a) Erosion Control Blankets

Figure 14. Compost Blanket, Highway 61, Cook Co. (2003)

3c) Compost Logs

POTENTIAL RETROFIT LOCATIONS

OVERVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER PERMIT REQUIREMENTS

The Construction Stormwater Permit requires the development and implementation of a

Three categories of applicable retrofit BMPs were identified, including:

Fish Passage Active

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Priority Concerns Action Items

Note: Numbers below correspond to locations on Appendix C Maps #1 – #5

Parking Area Highway 61 Primary When

Parking Area Highway 61 Primary Users When Open

Parking Area Highway 61 Primary Users When Open

You might also like