(50 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
[[File:mids logo.jpg|300px|thumb|alt=image of Minimal Impact Design Standards logo|For more information on the Design Sequence Flow Chart see the following:<br>
 +
*[[Flexible treatment options]]<br>
 +
*[http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/File:Final_MIDS_Flow_chart.pdf MIDS flow chart]<br>
 +
*[[List of flow chart questions|List of steps in flow chart]]]]
 
[[File:Wiki flow chart sequence.png|250px|thumb|alt=image of flow chart used for wiki|<font size=3>Click on image to enlarge. Note the steps in this image may differ from the steps described on this page.</font size>]]
 
[[File:Wiki flow chart sequence.png|250px|thumb|alt=image of flow chart used for wiki|<font size=3>Click on image to enlarge. Note the steps in this image may differ from the steps described on this page.</font size>]]
  
Line 21: Line 25:
  
 
===Conduct site review===
 
===Conduct site review===
*[http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod/aerial.html Aerial photos] and [http://nationalmap.gov/ustopo/ topographic maps]
+
*[https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/ Aerial photos] and [https://www.usgs.gov/programs/national-geospatial-program/topographic-maps topographic maps]
*County [http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/surveylist/soils/survey/state/?stateId=MN soil surveys] and other soil information as available
+
*County [https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/conservation-basics/natural-resource-concerns/soil/soil-surveys-by-state soil surveys] and other soil information as available
 
*[http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/groundwater_section/mapping/status.html County Geologic Atlas]
 
*[http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/groundwater_section/mapping/status.html County Geologic Atlas]
 
*Local groundwater levels
 
*Local groundwater levels
*[http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/index.htm DWSMA] and [http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/whp/index.htm Wellhead Protection maps]
+
*[https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/water/swp/mapviewer.html DWSMA] and [https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/water/swp/index.htm Wellhead Protection maps]
 
*[http://www.fema.gov/ FEMA] and [http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt_section/floodplain/fema_firms.html local floodplain maps]
 
*[http://www.fema.gov/ FEMA] and [http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt_section/floodplain/fema_firms.html local floodplain maps]
 
*Soil borings and site survey
 
*Soil borings and site survey
 
*MPCA listing of [http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/data/wimn-whats-in-my-neighborhood/whats-in-my-neighborhood.html potentially contaminated sites]
 
*MPCA listing of [http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/data/wimn-whats-in-my-neighborhood/whats-in-my-neighborhood.html potentially contaminated sites]
*[http://dnr.wi.gov/files/pdf/pubs/am/am465.pdf Phase 1 and 2 Environmental Site Assessments]
+
*[https://www.gleassociates.com/phase-i-versus-phase-ii-environmental-site-assessments/#:~:text=Phase%20I%20vs%20Phase%20II%20Site%20Assessments%E2%80%94Side%20by%20Side&text=A%20Phase%20I%20primarily%20assesses,contamination%20is%20in%20fact%20present. Phase 1 and 2 Environmental Site Assessments]
 
*[http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-types-and-programs/minnesotas-impaired-waters-and-tmdls/minnesotas-impaired-waters-and-total-maximum-daily-loads-tmdls.html TMDLs] and local [http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-types-and-programs/minnesotas-impaired-waters-and-tmdls/impaired-waters-list.html water quality standards]
 
*[http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-types-and-programs/minnesotas-impaired-waters-and-tmdls/minnesotas-impaired-waters-and-total-maximum-daily-loads-tmdls.html TMDLs] and local [http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-types-and-programs/minnesotas-impaired-waters-and-tmdls/impaired-waters-list.html water quality standards]
*[http://www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/delineation/ Wetland delineations], [http://www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/mnram/ MNRAM assessments], and [http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/wetlands/types.html wetland classifications]
+
*[https://bwsr.state.mn.us/wetland-delineation Wetland delineations], [https://bwsr.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/2018-12/WETLANDS_Function_MnRAM_Comprehensive_Guidance.pdf MNRAM assessments], and [https://bwsr.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/2018-12/WETLANDS_Function_MnRAM_Wetland_Mgmt_Classification_Guidance.pdf wetland classifications]
 
*Proposed conditions, conceptual/preliminary site design
 
*Proposed conditions, conceptual/preliminary site design
 
*Local zoning and land use requirements/ordinances, including stormwater rate control requirements
 
*Local zoning and land use requirements/ordinances, including stormwater rate control requirements
Line 42: Line 46:
  
 
==Step 3==
 
==Step 3==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 
[[File:Impermeable surfaces.png|thumb|150px|alt=photo of impervious surfaces|<font size=3>Impervious surfaces includes roads, roofs, sidewalks, and parking lots.</font size>]]
 
[[File:Impermeable surfaces.png|thumb|150px|alt=photo of impervious surfaces|<font size=3>Impervious surfaces includes roads, roofs, sidewalks, and parking lots.</font size>]]
  
Line 54: Line 59:
 
*[[Performance goals for new development, re-development and linear projects]]
 
*[[Performance goals for new development, re-development and linear projects]]
 
*For background and derivation of the performance goals, see technical documents and presentations on the [http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-types-and-programs/stormwater/stormwater-minimal-impact-design-standards-mids.html MIDS website]. We provide links to some of these documents and presentations below.
 
*For background and derivation of the performance goals, see technical documents and presentations on the [http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-types-and-programs/stormwater/stormwater-minimal-impact-design-standards-mids.html MIDS website]. We provide links to some of these documents and presentations below.
**[http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/view-document.html?gid=14328 Preliminary Performance Goal Alternatives Evaluation]
+
**[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=File:P-gen3-12i.pdf Preliminary Performance Goal Alternatives Evaluation]
**[http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/view-document.html?gid=15664 Assessment of MIDS Performance Goal Alternatives: Runoff Volumes, Runoff Rates, and Pollutant Removal Efficiencies]
+
**[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=File:Assessment_MIDS_performance_goal_alternatives.pdf Assessment of MIDS Performance Goal Alternatives: Runoff Volumes, Runoff Rates, and Pollutant Removal Efficiencies]
**[http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/view-document.html?gid=15517 Credit Methodology System Review]
+
**[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=File:P-gen3-13a.pdf Performance goal review]
**[http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/view-document.html?gid=15796 Performance goal review]
 
  
 
==Step 4==
 
==Step 4==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Does project create one acre or more of new and/or fully reconstructed impervious surfaces?
 
Does project create one acre or more of new and/or fully reconstructed impervious surfaces?
  
Line 68: Line 74:
  
 
==Step 5==
 
==Step 5==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flow chart<center>]]
  
 
<font size=3><span style="color:red">
 
<font size=3><span style="color:red">
 
'''MIDS PERFORMANCE GOAL DOES NOT APPLY'''
 
'''MIDS PERFORMANCE GOAL DOES NOT APPLY'''
 
</span></font size><br>
 
</span></font size><br>
 +
 
The project creates less than 1 acre of impervious surface.
 
The project creates less than 1 acre of impervious surface.
  
Line 78: Line 86:
  
 
Return to [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Minimal_Impact_Design_Standards Minimal Impact Design Standards main page]
 
Return to [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Minimal_Impact_Design_Standards Minimal Impact Design Standards main page]
 +
 +
Return to [[Design Sequence Flowchart-Flexible treatment options]]
  
 
==Step 6==
 
==Step 6==
[[File:Example  of mulch road.jpg|150px|thumb|alt=image of a project where ROW will not be constraining|<font size=3>Example of a linear project where site constraints likely do not exist</font size>]]
+
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 
+
[[File:Linear projects.png|300px|thumb|alt=image of linear projects|<font size=3>Example of a linear project where site constraints likely do not exist (left) and do exist (right)</font size>]]
[[File:Example limited ROW.jpg|150px|thumb|alt=image of a project where ROW will be constraining|<font size=3>Example of a linear project where ROW will likely be constraining</font size>]]
 
  
 
Is the project linear?
 
Is the project linear?
Line 90: Line 99:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_11 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_11 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Does project create one acre or more of new and/or fully reconstructed impervious surfaces? '''Answer''' - Yes
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Does project create one acre or more of new and/or fully reconstructed impervious surfaces? '''Answer''' - Yes
  
 
==Step 7==
 
==Step 7==
Line 100: Line 109:
  
 
==Step 8==
 
==Step 8==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
  
Line 106: Line 117:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_10 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_10 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there restraints due to lack of available right-of-way, off-site drainage, and/or rate control requirements? '''Answer''': Yes
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Are there restraints due to lack of available right-of-way, off-site drainage, and/or rate control requirements? '''Answer''': Yes
  
 
==Step 9==
 
==Step 9==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flowchart</center>]]
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
<font size=5>
+
<font size=4>'''Select Flexible treatment Option 2'''</font size>
'''Select Flexible treatment Option 2'''. You have completed the flow chart.
 
</font size>
 
  
*Provide documentation of offsite runon to project area
 
*Provide documentation of lack of right-of-way
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 +
#No infiltration practices allowed, and
 +
#Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
  
PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that the site is linear, there are constraints due to lack of right-of-way or off/site drainage and/or rate control requirements, and a reasonable effort to acquire all of the right-of-way cannot be made.
+
Provide the following information
 +
*Documentation of offsite runon to project area
 +
*Documentation of lack of right-of-way
 +
 
 +
'''PREVIOUS STEP''': It was determined that the site is linear, there are constraints due to lack of right-of-way or off/site drainage and/or rate control requirements, and a reasonable effort to acquire all of the right-of-way cannot be made.
  
 
==Step 10==
 
==Step 10==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flow chart<center>]]
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
===SELECT FLEXIBLE TREATMENT OPTION 3===
+
<font size=4>'''Select Flexible Treatment Option 3'''</font size>
 
Off-site mitigation (including banking or cash or treatment on another project, as determined by the local authority) equivalent to the volume reduction performance goal can be used in areas selected in the following order of preference:
 
Off-site mitigation (including banking or cash or treatment on another project, as determined by the local authority) equivalent to the volume reduction performance goal can be used in areas selected in the following order of preference:
 
#Locations that yield benefits to the same receiving water that receives runoff from the original construction activity.
 
#Locations that yield benefits to the same receiving water that receives runoff from the original construction activity.
Line 136: Line 149:
 
#Locations anywhere within the local authority's jurisdiction.
 
#Locations anywhere within the local authority's jurisdiction.
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION: It was determined that Flexible Treatment Option 2 is not feasible.
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION''': It was determined that Flexible Treatment Option 2 is not feasible.
  
 
==Step 11==
 
==Step 11==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Are there zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible?
 
Are there zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible?
  
Line 145: Line 160:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_15 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_15 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''':
 
*Is the project linear? Answer: No
 
*Is the project linear? Answer: No
 
or
 
or
Line 151: Line 166:
  
 
==Step 12==
 
==Step 12==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is BMP relocation feasible
 
Is BMP relocation feasible
  
Line 157: Line 174:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_13 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_13 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible? '''Answer''': Yes
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Are there zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible? '''Answer''': Yes
  
 
==Step 13==
 
==Step 13==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 1 feasible?
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 1 feasible?
  
Line 166: Line 185:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_14 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_14 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation feasible - '''Answer''': No
+
:'''Flexible Treatment Option 1 (FTO #1)'''
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 1 (FTO #1)===
 
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve at least 0.55 inch volume reduction goal, and
 
#Achieve at least 0.55 inch volume reduction goal, and
 
#Remove 75 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Remove 75 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of reloacting project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site
+
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site
 +
 
 +
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is BMP relocation feasible - '''Answer''': No
  
 
==Step 14==
 
==Step 14==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
  
Line 181: Line 202:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_10 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_10 No]
  
==PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 1 feasible? - '''Answer''': No
+
:'''Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)'''
  
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 +
 +
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 1 feasible? - '''Answer''': No
  
 
==Step 15==
 
==Step 15==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
[[File:Minnesota DWSMAs.png|thumb|300px|alt=map of DWSMAs in Minnesota|<font size=3>Map illustrating location of [https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/water/swp/mapviewer.html Drinking Water Supply Management Areas] (DWSMAs) in Minnesota.</font size>]]
 +
 
Is the site located in a DWSMA (Drinking Water Supply Management Area), wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well?
 
Is the site located in a DWSMA (Drinking Water Supply Management Area), wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well?
  
Line 195: Line 220:
  
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_17 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_17 No]
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
 
*Are there zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
*Is BMP relocation feasible? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
  
 
===Discussion===
 
===Discussion===
Line 205: Line 225:
  
 
===Links===
 
===Links===
*The Minnesota Department of Health maintains [http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/maps/ maps], shapefiles and other information on source water protection in Minnesota, including maps of Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMAs).
+
*The Minnesota Department of Health maintains maps, shapefiles and other information on source water protection in Minnesota, including maps of Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMAs).
*[http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/ Minnesota Department of Health Source Water Protection] main page
+
*[https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/water/swp/index.htm Minnesota Department of Health Source Water Protection] main page
*http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/sourcewater/protection/index.cfm United States Environmental Protection Agency] Source Water protection page
+
*[http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/sourcewater/protection/index.cfm United States Environmental Protection Agency] Source Water protection page
*[http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/stormwater.pdf Evaluating Proposed Stormwater Infiltration Projects in Vulnerable Wellhead Protection Areas]
+
*[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/images/3/3a/Evaluating_Proposed_Stormwater_Infiltration_Projects_in_Vulnerable_Wellhead_Protection_Areas.pdf Evaluating Proposed Stormwater Infiltration Projects in Vulnerable Wellhead Protection Areas]
 +
 
 +
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER'''
 +
*Are there zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible? - '''Answer''': No
 +
or
 +
*Is BMP relocation feasible? - '''Answer''': Yes
  
 
==Step 16==
 
==Step 16==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Can a Local Government Unit (LGU) provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater?
 
Can a Local Government Unit (LGU) provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater?
  
Line 217: Line 244:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_58 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_58 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is the site located in a DWSMA, Wellhead Protection Area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well? - Answer: Yes
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is the site located in a DWSMA, Wellhead Protection Area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well? - Answer: Yes
  
 
==Step 17==
 
==Step 17==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure (e.g. rate control BMPs, utilities, buildings, roadway, easements) that make the Performance Goal not feasible?
 
Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure (e.g. rate control BMPs, utilities, buildings, roadway, easements) that make the Performance Goal not feasible?
  
Line 226: Line 255:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_21 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_21 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER'''
 
*Is the site located in a DWSMA, wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well? - '''Answer''': No
 
*Is the site located in a DWSMA, wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
or
Line 232: Line 261:
  
 
==Step 18==
 
==Step 18==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is BMP relocation feasible?
 
Is BMP relocation feasible?
  
Line 238: Line 269:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_19 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_19 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: - Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure (e.g. rate control BMPs, utilities, buildings, roadway, easements) that make the Performance Goal not feasible? - '''Answer''': Yes
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': - Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure (e.g. rate control BMPs, utilities, buildings, roadway, easements) that make the Performance Goal not feasible? - '''Answer''': Yes
  
 
==Step 19==
 
==Step 19==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is Flexible Treatment option (FTO) 1 feasible?
 
Is Flexible Treatment option (FTO) 1 feasible?
  
Line 247: Line 280:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_20 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_20 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation feasible? - '''Answer''': No
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is BMP relocation feasible? - '''Answer''': No
  
 
==Step 20==
 
==Step 20==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
  
Line 256: Line 291:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_10 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_10 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 1 feasible? - '''Answer''': No
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 1 feasible? - '''Answer''': No
  
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
Line 265: Line 300:
  
 
==Step 21==
 
==Step 21==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is karst present on the site?
 
Is karst present on the site?
  
[[MIDS design sequence flow chart - Step 22|Yes]]
+
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_22 Yes]
  
[[MIDS design sequence flow chart - Step 26|No]]
+
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_26 No]
  
 
If you are unsure, we recommend you review the guidance for karst in this manual. To retain your place in this flowchart, either open the [http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Karst karst guidance] page in a new tab (right click on the link and select ''Open Link in New Tab''), use the back arrow after visiting the karst guidance page, or use the Breadcrumbs at the top of the page.
 
If you are unsure, we recommend you review the guidance for karst in this manual. To retain your place in this flowchart, either open the [http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Karst karst guidance] page in a new tab (right click on the link and select ''Open Link in New Tab''), use the back arrow after visiting the karst guidance page, or use the Breadcrumbs at the top of the page.
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:  
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''':  
 
*Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make the performance goal not feasible? - '''Answer''': No
 
*Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make the performance goal not feasible? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
or
Line 279: Line 316:
  
 
==Step 22==
 
==Step 22==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Can a local unit of government (LGU) provide a higher level of [[Karst#Investigation for karst areas|engineering review]] to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater?
 
Can a local unit of government (LGU) provide a higher level of [[Karst#Investigation for karst areas|engineering review]] to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater?
  
Line 285: Line 324:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_23 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_23 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is karst present on the site? - '''Answer''': Yes
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is karst present on the site? - '''Answer''': Yes
  
 
==Step 23==
 
==Step 23==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is BMP relocation onsite to a location without karst feasible?
 
Is BMP relocation onsite to a location without karst feasible?
  
Line 294: Line 335:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_24 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_24 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Can a local unit of government (LGU) provide a higher level of [[Karst#Investigation for karst areas|engineering review]] to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater? - '''Answer''': No
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Can a local unit of government (LGU) provide a higher level of [[Karst#Investigation for karst areas|engineering review]] to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater? - '''Answer''': No
  
 
==Step 24==
 
==Step 24==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
  
Line 303: Line 346:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_10 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_10 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation onsite to a location without karst feasible? - '''Answer''': No
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is BMP relocation onsite to a location without karst feasible? - '''Answer''': No
  
 
==Step 25==
 
==Step 25==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flow chart<center>]]
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
 +
<font size=4>'''Select Flexible treatment Option 2'''</font size>
  
Select Flexible treatment Option 2
+
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 +
#No infiltration practices allowed, and
 +
#Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
 +
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 +
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 +
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
  
*No infiltration practices allowed
+
Provide the following information
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
 
*Provide soil borings or report from a professional geologist or geotechnical engineer
 
*Provide soil borings or report from a professional geologist or geotechnical engineer
  
Line 320: Line 370:
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
  
{{alert|Previous step:
+
'''PREVIOUS STEP''': It was determined that karst is present within 1000 feet of the site and the BMP cannot be reloacted so that it is more than 1000 feet from karst
It was determined that karst is present within 1000 feet of the site and the BMP cannot be reloacted so that it is more than 1000 feet from karst |alert-info}}
 
  
<font size=5>You have completed the flow chart</font size>
+
==Step 26==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
==Step 26==
 
 
Is shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock present on site?
 
Is shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock present on site?
  
Line 334: Line 383:
 
If you are unsure, we recommend you review the guidance for shallow groundwater in this manual. To retain your place in this flowchart, either open the [http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Shallow_groundwater shallow groundwater guidance] page in a new tab (right click on the link and select ''Open Link in New Tab''), use the back arrow after visiting the shallow groundwater guidance page, or use the Breadcrumbs at the top of the page.
 
If you are unsure, we recommend you review the guidance for shallow groundwater in this manual. To retain your place in this flowchart, either open the [http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Shallow_groundwater shallow groundwater guidance] page in a new tab (right click on the link and select ''Open Link in New Tab''), use the back arrow after visiting the shallow groundwater guidance page, or use the Breadcrumbs at the top of the page.
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''':
 
*Is karst present on the site? - '''Answer''': No
 
*Is karst present on the site? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
or
Line 342: Line 391:
  
 
==Step 27==
 
==Step 27==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Conduct a detailed site investigation of [[Shallow groundwater|shallow groundwater]] or [[Shallow soils and shallow depth to bedrock#Investigation for shallow bedrock areas|shallow bedrock]]
 
Conduct a detailed site investigation of [[Shallow groundwater|shallow groundwater]] or [[Shallow soils and shallow depth to bedrock#Investigation for shallow bedrock areas|shallow bedrock]]
  
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_28 Next question]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_28 Next question]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock present on site? - '''Answer''': Yes
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock present on site? - '''Answer''': Yes
  
 
==Step 28==
 
==Step 28==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is there more than 3 feet of soil depth from bottom of BMP to bedrock or groundwater (more than 10 feet is preferred)?
 
Is there more than 3 feet of soil depth from bottom of BMP to bedrock or groundwater (more than 10 feet is preferred)?
  
Line 355: Line 408:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_29 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_29 No]
  
PREVIOUS STEP: You were asked to conduct a detailed site investigation of [[Shallow groundwater|shallow groundwater]] or [[Shallow soils and shallow depth to bedrock#Investigation for shallow bedrock areas|shallow bedrock]]
+
'''PREVIOUS STEP''': You were asked to conduct a detailed site investigation of [[Shallow groundwater|shallow groundwater]] or [[Shallow soils and shallow depth to bedrock#Investigation for shallow bedrock areas|shallow bedrock]]
  
 
==Step 29==
 
==Step 29==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is BMP relocation onsite to avoid shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock feasible?
 
Is BMP relocation onsite to avoid shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock feasible?
  
Line 364: Line 419:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_30 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_30 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is there more than 3 feet of soil depth from the bottom on the BMP to bedrock and groundwater (more than 10 feet is preferred)? - '''Answer''': No
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is there more than 3 feet of soil depth from the bottom on the BMP to bedrock and groundwater (more than 10 feet is preferred)? - '''Answer''': No
  
 
==Step 30==
 
==Step 30==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Can the BMP be raised?
 
Can the BMP be raised?
  
Line 373: Line 430:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_66 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_66 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation onsite to avoid shallow groundwater and shallow bedrock feasible? -  
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is BMP relocation onsite to avoid shallow groundwater and shallow bedrock feasible? -  
 
Answer: No
 
Answer: No
  
 
==Step 31==
 
==Step 31==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flow chart<center>]]
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
Select Flexible treatment Option 2
+
<font size=4>'''Select Flexible treatment Option 2'''</font size>
*No infiltration practices allowed
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
*Provide soil borings or report from a professional geologist or geotechnical engineer
 
  
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 +
#No infiltration practices allowed, and
 +
#Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
+
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
  
PREVIOUIS STEP: It was determined that shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock is present within 3 feet of the bottom of the BMP and the BMP cannot be relocated or raised in elevation to achieve a 3 foot or greater separation from bedrock or groundwater.
+
Provide the following information
 +
*Soil borings or report from a professional geologist or geotechnical engineer
  
'''You have completed the flow chart'''
+
'''PREVIOUS STEP''': It was determined that shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock is present within 3 feet of the bottom of the BMP and the BMP cannot be relocated or raised in elevation to achieve a 3 foot or greater separation from bedrock or groundwater.
  
 
==Step 32==
 
==Step 32==
 
Raise BMP enough to ensure 3 feet (preferably 10 feet) of soil between bottom of BMP and top of bedrock and groundwater
 
Raise BMP enough to ensure 3 feet (preferably 10 feet) of soil between bottom of BMP and top of bedrock and groundwater
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_33 Proceed to Next Step]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_33 Proceed to Next Step]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER Can the BMP be raised? '''Answer''' - Yes
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Can the BMP be raised? '''Answer''' - Yes
  
 
==Step 33==
 
==Step 33==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is there presence of contaminated soils and/or contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff?
 
Is there presence of contaminated soils and/or contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff?
  
Line 408: Line 468:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_36 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_36 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''':
 
*Is shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock present on the site? - '''Answer''': No
 
*Is shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock present on the site? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
or
Line 418: Line 478:
  
 
==Step 34==
 
==Step 34==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Can hotspot or contamination be isolated or remediated to mitigate risk of increased contamination?
 
Can hotspot or contamination be isolated or remediated to mitigate risk of increased contamination?
  
Line 424: Line 486:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_35 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_35 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is there presence of contaminated soils and/or contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff? - '''Answer''': Yes
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is there presence of contaminated soils and/or contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff? - '''Answer''': Yes
  
 
==Step 35==
 
==Step 35==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flow chart<center>]]
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
Select Flexible treatment Option 2
+
<font size=4>'''Select Flexible treatment Option 2'''</font size>
*No infiltration practices allowed
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
*Provide Phase I or II ESAs or other documentation of potential contamination or hotspot runoff
 
*Provide documentation of extent of contamination and remediation alternatives considered
 
  
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 +
#No infiltration practices allowed, and
 +
#Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
+
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
  
PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that contaminated soil, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff is present on the site and cannot be isolated or mitigated.
+
Provide the following information
 +
*Provide Phase I or II ESAs or other documentation of potential contamination or hotspot runoff
 +
*Provide documentation of extent of contamination and remediation alternatives considered
  
'''You have completed the flow chart'''
+
'''PREVIOUS STEP''': It was determined that contaminated soil, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff is present on the site and cannot be isolated or mitigated.
  
 
==Step 36==
 
==Step 36==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Are there very low infiltrating soils (less than 0.2 inches per hour) on site?
 
Are there very low infiltrating soils (less than 0.2 inches per hour) on site?
  
Line 452: Line 516:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_42 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_42 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''':
 
*Is there presence of contaminated soils, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff on the site? - '''Answer''': No
 
*Is there presence of contaminated soils, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff on the site? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
or
Line 458: Line 522:
  
 
==Step 37==
 
==Step 37==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is BMP relocation onsite to a higher-infiltrating location feasible?
 
Is BMP relocation onsite to a higher-infiltrating location feasible?
  
Line 464: Line 530:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_38 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_38 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there very low infiltrating soils (less than 0.2 inches per hour) on site? - '''Answer''': Yes
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Are there very low infiltrating soils (less than 0.2 inches per hour) on site? - '''Answer''': Yes
  
 
==Step 38==
 
==Step 38==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Can BMP be sized to drain dry within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)?
 
Can BMP be sized to drain dry within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)?
  
Line 473: Line 541:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_39 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_39 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation onsite to a higher-infiltrating location feasible? - '''Answer''': No
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is BMP relocation onsite to a higher-infiltrating location feasible? - '''Answer''': No
  
 
==Step 39==
 
==Step 39==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Provide [[Soils with low infiltration capacity#Investigation for low infiltration capacity soils|soil boring or infiltration test results]] documenting low-infiltration soils.
 
Provide [[Soils with low infiltration capacity#Investigation for low infiltration capacity soils|soil boring or infiltration test results]] documenting low-infiltration soils.
  
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_40 Next question]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_40 Next question]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Can BMP be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)? '''Answer''': No
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Can BMP be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)? '''Answer''': No
  
 
==Step 40==
 
==Step 40==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is Flexible Treatment Alternative No 1 feasible, allowing BMP to drain in 48 hours?
 
Is Flexible Treatment Alternative No 1 feasible, allowing BMP to drain in 48 hours?
  
Line 489: Line 561:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_41 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_41 No]
  
PREVIOUS STEP: You were asked to provide [[Soils with low infiltration capacity#Investigation for low infiltration capacity soils|soil boring or infiltration test results]] documenting low-infiltration soils.
+
'''PREVIOUS STEP''': You were asked to provide [[Soils with low infiltration capacity#Investigation for low infiltration capacity soils|soil boring or infiltration test results]] documenting low-infiltration soils.
  
 
==Step 41==
 
==Step 41==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flow chart<center>]]
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
Select Flexible treatment Option 2
+
<font size=4>'''Select Flexible treatment Option 2'''</font size>
*No infiltration practices allowed
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
*Provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting low-infiltration soils
 
  
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 +
#No infiltration practices allowed, and
 +
#Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
+
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
  
PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that soils on the site have an infiltration rate of less than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to areas with a higher infiltration rate, and the BMP cannot be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)
+
Provide the following information
 +
*Provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting low-infiltration soils
  
You have completed the flow chart
+
'''PREVIOUS STEP''': It was determined that soils on the site have an infiltration rate of less than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to areas with a higher infiltration rate, and the BMP cannot be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)
  
 
==Step 42==
 
==Step 42==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Are there very high infiltrating soils (more than 8 inches per hour) on site?
 
Are there very high infiltrating soils (more than 8 inches per hour) on site?
  
Line 516: Line 590:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_46 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_46 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''':
 
*Are there very low infiltrating soils (less than 0.2 inches per hour) present on site? - '''Answer''': No
 
*Are there very low infiltrating soils (less than 0.2 inches per hour) present on site? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
or
Line 524: Line 598:
  
 
==Step 43==
 
==Step 43==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is BMP relocation onsite to a lower-infiltrating location feasible?
 
Is BMP relocation onsite to a lower-infiltrating location feasible?
  
Line 530: Line 606:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_44 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_44 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there very high infiltrating soils (more than 8 inches per hour) on site? - '''Answer''': Yes
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Are there very high infiltrating soils (more than 8 inches per hour) on site? - '''Answer''': Yes
  
 
==Step 44==
 
==Step 44==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Can subgrade be modified to slow the rate of infiltration to less than 8 inches per hour?
 
Can subgrade be modified to slow the rate of infiltration to less than 8 inches per hour?
  
Line 539: Line 617:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_45 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_45 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation onsite to a lower-infiltrating location feasible? - '''Answer''': No
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is BMP relocation onsite to a lower-infiltrating location feasible? - '''Answer''': No
  
 
==Step 45==
 
==Step 45==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flow chart<center>]]
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
Select Flexible treatment Option 2
+
<font size=4>'''Select Flexible treatment Option 2'''</font size>
*No infiltration practices allowed
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
*Provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting high-infiltration soils
 
  
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 +
#No infiltration practices allowed, and
 +
#Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
+
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER
+
Provide the following information
{{alert|It was determined that soils on the site have an infiltration rate greater than 8 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to an area with an infiltration rate lower than 8 inches per hour, or the subgrade cannot be modified to slow the infiltration rate to less than 8 inches per hour
+
*Provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting high-infiltration soils
|alert-info}}
 
  
You have completed the flow chart
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': It was determined that soils on the site have an infiltration rate greater than 8 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to an area with an infiltration rate lower than 8 inches per hour, or the subgrade cannot be modified to slow the infiltration rate to less than 8 inches per hour
  
 
==Step 46==
 
==Step 46==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Are there adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices (e.g. impacting perched wetland)?
 
Are there adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices (e.g. impacting perched wetland)?
  
Line 568: Line 646:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_51 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_51 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there very high infiltrating soils (greater than 8 inches per hour) present on site)? - '''Answer''': No
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Are there very high infiltrating soils (greater than 8 inches per hour) present on site)? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
or
 
*Is BMP relocation onsite to a lower infiltrating location feasible? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
*Is BMP relocation onsite to a lower infiltrating location feasible? - '''Answer''': Yes
Line 575: Line 653:
  
 
==Step 47==
 
==Step 47==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Can the BMP be relocated to avoid adverse hydrologic impacts?
 
Can the BMP be relocated to avoid adverse hydrologic impacts?
  
Line 581: Line 661:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_48 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_48 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices (e.g. impacting perched wetland)? - '''Answer''': Yes
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Are there adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices (e.g. impacting perched wetland)? - '''Answer''': Yes
  
 
==Step 48==
 
==Step 48==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Would BMPs accomodating Flexible treatment option 1 avoid adverse hydrologic impacts?
 
Would BMPs accomodating Flexible treatment option 1 avoid adverse hydrologic impacts?
  
Line 590: Line 672:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_49 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_49 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Can the BMP be relocated to avoid adverse hydrologic impacts? - '''Answer''': No
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Can the BMP be relocated to avoid adverse hydrologic impacts? - '''Answer''': No
  
 
==Step 49==
 
==Step 49==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flow chart<center>]]
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
Select FTO Alternative No. 2
+
<font size=4>'''Select Flexible treatment Option 2'''</font size>
*Maximize infiltration BMPs to treat up to the 0.55 inch goal, if possible
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
*provide report documenting potential hydrologic impacts from infiltration on the site, prepared by a registered engineer, hydrologist, or wetland specialist
 
  
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 +
#Maximize infiltration BMPs to treat up to the 0.55 inch goal, if possible, and
 +
#Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
+
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
  
You have completed the flow chart
+
Provide the following information
 +
*provide report documenting potential hydrologic impacts from infiltration on the site, prepared by a registered engineer, hydrologist, or wetland specialist
  
 
==Step 50==
 
==Step 50==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flow chart<center>]]
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
Select FTO Alternative No. 1
+
:<font size=4>'''Select Flexible Treatment Option 1 (FTO #1)'''</font size>
  
===Flexible Treatment Option 1 (FTO #1)===
+
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
 
#Achieve at least 0.55 inch volume reduction goal, and
 
#Achieve at least 0.55 inch volume reduction goal, and
 
#Remove 75 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Remove 75 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of reloacting project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site
 
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of reloacting project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site
  
===Additional considerations===
+
Additional considerations
 
*Maximize infiltration BMPs to treat more than 0.55 inch goal if possible
 
*Maximize infiltration BMPs to treat more than 0.55 inch goal if possible
 
*If Flexible Treatment Option 1 was determined based on presence of low infiltrating soils, provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting low-infiltrating soils
 
*If Flexible Treatment Option 1 was determined based on presence of low infiltrating soils, provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting low-infiltrating soils
 
*if Flexible Treatment Option 1 was determined based on presence of adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices, provide a report that documents the potential hydrologic impacts from infiltration on the site, prepared by a registered engineer, hydrologist, or wetlands specialist.
 
*if Flexible Treatment Option 1 was determined based on presence of adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices, provide a report that documents the potential hydrologic impacts from infiltration on the site, prepared by a registered engineer, hydrologist, or wetlands specialist.
 
You have completed the flow chart
 
  
 
==Step 51==
 
==Step 51==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flow chart<center>]]
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
Complete design using the following performance goals
+
<font size=4>'''Complete design using the following performance goals'''</font size>
*New development projects
 
**1.1 inches from new impervious surfaces
 
**Redevelopment projects - 1.1 inches from new impervious surfaces
 
*Linear projects
 
**0.55 inches of runoff from the new and fully reconstructed impervious surfaces
 
**1.1 inches of runoff from the net increase in impervious area
 
  
You have completed the flow chart
+
New development projects
 +
*1.1 inches from new impervious surfaces
 +
*Redevelopment projects - 1.1 inches from new impervious surfaces
 +
Linear projects
 +
*0.55 inches of runoff from the new and fully reconstructed impervious surfaces
 +
*1.1 inches of runoff from the net increase in impervious area
  
 
==Step 52==
 
==Step 52==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
*Zoning and land use requirements make [[Flexible treatment options#Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)|Flexible Treatment Option 2]] not feasible
 
*Zoning and land use requirements make [[Flexible treatment options#Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)|Flexible Treatment Option 2]] not feasible
Line 650: Line 732:
  
 
==Step 53==
 
==Step 53==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
*There are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make [[Flexible treatment options#Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)|Flexible Treatment Option 2]] not feasible
 
*There are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make [[Flexible treatment options#Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)|Flexible Treatment Option 2]] not feasible
Line 659: Line 743:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_63 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_63 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: You determined that Flexible Treatment Option 2 is feasible and there are no limitations resulting from zoning and land use requirements.
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': You determined that Flexible Treatment Option 2 is feasible and there are no limitations resulting from zoning and land use requirements.
  
 
==Step 54==
 
==Step 54==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Do any of the following conditions apply? (NOTE: If any condition applies, you do not need to answer the remaining questions.)
 
Do any of the following conditions apply? (NOTE: If any condition applies, you do not need to answer the remaining questions.)
 
*The site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well, and infiltration is not allowed by the LGU
 
*The site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well, and infiltration is not allowed by the LGU
Line 684: Line 770:
  
 
==Step 55==
 
==Step 55==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
*There are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make FTO 2 not feasible
 
*There are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make FTO 2 not feasible
Line 693: Line 781:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_56 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_56 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''':
 
You determined that Flexible Treatment Option 2 is feasible and there are no limitations resulting from zoning and land use requirements.
 
You determined that Flexible Treatment Option 2 is feasible and there are no limitations resulting from zoning and land use requirements.
  
 
==Step 56==
 
==Step 56==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flow chart<center>]]
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
Select Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2
+
<font size=4>'''Select Flexible treatment Option 2'''</font size>
*No infiltration practices allowed
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
*Provide DWSMA or well location map
 
  
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 +
#No infiltration practices allowed, and
 +
#Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
#options  considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
+
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 +
*No infiltration practices allowed
 +
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
  
PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that the site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area or within 200 feet of a drinking water well and infiltration is not allowed by the LGU.
+
Provide the foillowing information
 +
*Provide DWSMA or well location map
  
You have completed the flow chart
+
'''PREVIOUS STEP''': It was determined that the site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area or within 200 feet of a drinking water well and infiltration is not allowed by the LGU.
  
 
==Step 57==
 
==Step 57==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Do any of the following conditions apply? (NOTE: If any condition applies, you do not need to answer the remaining questions.)
 
Do any of the following conditions apply? (NOTE: If any condition applies, you do not need to answer the remaining questions.)
 
*The site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area or within 200 feet of a drinking water well and Can a Local Government Unit (LGU) provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater.
 
*The site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area or within 200 feet of a drinking water well and Can a Local Government Unit (LGU) provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater.
Line 731: Line 823:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_52 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_52 No]
  
PREVIOUS STEP: You determined that flexible Treatment option 1 is feasible.
+
'''PREVIOUS STEP''': You determined that flexible Treatment option 1 is feasible.
  
 
==Step 58==
 
==Step 58==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option 2 feasible?
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option 2 feasible?
  
Line 747: Line 841:
  
 
==Step 59==
 
==Step 59==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
*There are very high infiltrating soils (more than 8 inches per hour) on the site;
 
*There are very high infiltrating soils (more than 8 inches per hour) on the site;
Line 756: Line 852:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_60 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_60 No]
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is Flexible Treatment Alternative No 1 feasible, allowing BMP to drain in 48 hours? - '''Answer''': Yes
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Is Flexible Treatment Alternative No 1 feasible, allowing BMP to drain in 48 hours? - '''Answer''': Yes
  
 
==Step 60==
 
==Step 60==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
*There are adverse hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices
 
*There are adverse hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices
Line 775: Line 873:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_62 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_62 No]
  
PREVIOUS STEP: You determined that flexible Treatment option 1 is feasible.
+
'''PREVIOUS STEP''': You determined that flexible Treatment option 1 is feasible.
  
 
==Step 62==
 
==Step 62==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Do any of the following conditions apply? (NOTE: If any condition applies, you do not need to answer the remaining questions.)
 
Do any of the following conditions apply? (NOTE: If any condition applies, you do not need to answer the remaining questions.)
 
*The site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well, and a Local Government Unit (LGU) can provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater.
 
*The site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well, and a Local Government Unit (LGU) can provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater.
Line 796: Line 896:
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_60 No]
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_60 No]
  
PREVIOUS STEP: You determined that Flexible Treatment Option 1 is feasible.
+
'''PREVIOUS STEP''': You determined that Flexible Treatment Option 1 is feasible.
  
 
==Step 63==
 
==Step 63==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
 +
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
*There are adverse hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices; and
 
*There are adverse hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices; and
Line 808: Line 910:
  
 
==Step 64==
 
==Step 64==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flow chart<center>]]
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
Select Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2
+
<font size=4>'''Select Flexible treatment Option 2'''</font size>
*Provide  regulations and/or cost estimates  documenting infeasibility of meeting the original Performance goal
 
  
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 +
#No infiltration practices allowed, and
 +
#Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
+
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
  
PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that
+
Provide the following information
*there are no site conditions that prevent infiltration and there are no adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices, but
+
*Provide  regulations and/or cost estimates  documenting infeasibility of meeting the original Performance goal
**there are zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible; or
 
**there are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible.
 
  
You have completed the flow chart
+
'''PREVIOUS STEP''': It was determined that there are no site conditions that prevent infiltration and there are no adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices, but
 +
*there are zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible; or
 +
*there are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible.
  
 
==Step 65==
 
==Step 65==
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
+
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<center>You have completed the flow chart<center>]]
 
+
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
Select Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2
 
 
 
*Provide regulations and/or cost estimates  documenting infeasibility of meeting the original Performance goal;
 
*Maximize infiltration BMPs to treat up to the 0.55 inch goal, if possible;
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices; and
 
*Provide report documenting potential hydrologic impacts from infiltration on the site, prepared by a registered engineer, hydrologist, or wetland specialist
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
 
 
PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that
 
*there are no site conditions that prevent infiltration but
 
**there are adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices and BMP relocation is not feasible; and
 
**there are zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible; or
 
**there are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible.
 
 
 
You have completed the flow chart
 
 
 
==Step 66==
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_31 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_10 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Can the BMP be raised? - '''Answer''': No
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
<!--
 
==Box 1==
 
Did you gather the site information necessary to proceed through the flow chart?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_3 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_2 No or Unsure]
 
 
 
==Box 2==
 
Prior to using the flow chart, gather the following preliminary information.
 
 
 
*Conduct site review
 
*Define performance goal
 
 
 
===Conduct site review===
 
*[http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod/aerial.html Aerial photos] and [http://nationalmap.gov/ustopo/ topographic maps]
 
*County [http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/surveylist/soils/survey/state/?stateId=MN soil surveys] and other soil information as available
 
*[http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/groundwater_section/mapping/status.html County Geologic Atlas]
 
*Local groundwater levels
 
*[http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/index.htm DWSMA] and [http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/whp/index.htm Wellhead Protection maps]
 
*[http://www.fema.gov/ FEMA] and [http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt_section/floodplain/fema_firms.html local floodplain maps]
 
*Soil borings and site survey
 
*MPCA listing of [http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/data/wimn-whats-in-my-neighborhood/whats-in-my-neighborhood.html potentially contaminated sites]
 
*[http://dnr.wi.gov/files/pdf/pubs/am/am465.pdf Phase 1 and 2 Environmental Site Assessments]
 
*[http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-types-and-programs/minnesotas-impaired-waters-and-tmdls/minnesotas-impaired-waters-and-total-maximum-daily-loads-tmdls.html TMDLs] and local [http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-types-and-programs/minnesotas-impaired-waters-and-tmdls/impaired-waters-list.html water quality standards]
 
*[http://www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/delineation/ Wetland delineations], [http://www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/mnram/ MNRAM assessments], and [http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/wetlands/types.html wetland classifications]
 
*Proposed conditions, conceptual/preliminary site design
 
*Local zoning and land use requirements/ordinances, including stormwater rate control requirements
 
*Communication with local landowners, LGU, or others knowledgeable about the site
 
*Site inspection
 
 
 
<font size = 5>
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_3 '''PROCEED TO THE NEXT STEP''']
 
</font size>
 
 
 
==Box 3==
 
*New and redevelopment projects: Retain on site a volume of 1.1 inches from impervious surfaces
 
*Linear projects: Retain on site the larger of 1.1 inches from all new or 0.55 inches from all new and fully reconstructed impervious surfaces
 
 
 
<font size = 5>
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_4 '''PROCEED TO THE FIRST QUESTION''']
 
</font size>
 
 
 
===Links===
 
*[[Performance goals for new development, re-development and linear projects]]
 
*For background and derivation of the performance goals, see technical documents and presentations on the [http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-types-and-programs/stormwater/stormwater-minimal-impact-design-standards-mids.html MIDS website]. We provide links to some of these documents and presentations below.
 
**[http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/view-document.html?gid=14328 Preliminary Performance Goal Alternatives Evaluation]
 
**[http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/view-document.html?gid=15664 Assessment of MIDS Performance Goal Alternatives: Runoff Volumes, Runoff Rates, and Pollutant Removal Efficiencies]
 
**[http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/view-document.html?gid=15517 Credit Methodology System Review]
 
**[http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/view-document.html?gid=15796 Performance goal review]
 
 
 
==Box 4==
 
[[File:Impervious surface example 3.jpg|thumb|150px|alt=photo of impervious surface|<font size=3>Example of impervious surfaces. Image from the Metropolitan Design Center Image Book. &copy;Regents of the University of Minnesota. All rights reserved. Used with permission.</font size>]]
 
 
 
Does project create one acre or more of new and/or fully reconstructed impervious surfaces?
 
 
 
*[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_6 Yes]
 
*[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_5 No]
 
 
 
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': The [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_3 previous question] defined the performance goals.
 
 
 
==Box 5==
 
<font size=3><span style="color:red">
 
'''MIDS PERFORMANCE GOAL DOES NOT APPLY'''
 
</span></font size><br>
 
The project creates less than 1 acre of impervious surface.
 
 
 
==Box 6==
 
[[File:Example  of mulch road.jpg|150px|thumb|alt=image of a project where ROW will not be constraining|<font size=3>Example of a linear project where site constraints likely do not exist</font size>]]
 
 
 
[[File:Example limited ROW.jpg|150px|thumb|alt=image of a project where ROW will be constraining|<font size=3>Example of a linear project where ROW will likely be constraining</font size>]]
 
 
 
Is the project linear?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_7 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_11 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Does project create one acre or more of new and/or fully reconstructed impervious surfaces? '''Answer''' - Yes
 
 
 
==Box 7==
 
Are there constraints due to lack of available ROW, off site drainage and/or rate control requirements?
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_8 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_11 No]
 
 
 
==Box 8==
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_57 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_10 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there restraints due to lack of available right-of-way, off-site drainage, and/or rate control requirements? '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 9==
 
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
 
 
 
<font size=5>
 
'''Select Flexible treatment Option 2'''. You have completed the flow chart.
 
</font size>
 
  
*Provide documentation of offsite runon to project area
+
<font size=4>'''Select Flexible treatment Option 2'''</font size>
*Provide documentation of lack of right-of-way
 
  
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 +
#Maximize infiltration BMPs to treat up to the 0.55 inch goal, if possible and
 +
#Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
  
PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that the site is linear, there are constraints due to lack of right-of-way or off/site drainage and/or rate control requirements, and a reasonable effort to acquire all of the right-of-way cannot be made.
+
Provide the following information
 
 
==Box 10==
 
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
 
 
 
===SELECT FLEXIBLE TREATMENT OPTION 3===
 
Off-site mitigation (including banking or cash or treatment on another project, as determined by the local authority) equivalent to the volume reduction performance goal can be used in areas selected in the following order of preference:
 
#Locations that yield benefits to the same receiving water that receives runoff from the original construction activity.
 
#Locations within the same Department of Natural Resources (DNR) catachment area as the original construction activity.
 
#Locations in the next adjacent DNR catchment area up-stream.
 
#Locations anywhere within the local authority's jurisdiction.
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION: It was determined that Flexible Treatment Option 2 is not feasible.
 
 
 
==Box 11==
 
Are there zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_12 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_15 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
 
*Is the project linear? Answer: No
 
or
 
*Are there constraints due to lack of available ROW, off site drainage and/or rate control requirements? Answer: No
 
 
 
==Box 12==
 
Is BMP relocation feasible
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_15 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_13 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible? '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 13==
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 1 feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_61 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_14 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation feasible - '''Answer''': No
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 1 (FTO #1)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve at least 0.55 inch volume reduction goal, and
 
#Remove 75 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of reloacting project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site
 
 
 
==Box 14==
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_54 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_10 No]
 
 
 
==PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 1 feasible? - '''Answer''': No
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
 
 
==Box 15==
 
Is the site located in a DWSMA (Drinking Water Supply Management Area), wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_16 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_17 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
 
*Are there zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
*Is BMP relocation feasible? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
===Discussion===
 
A drinking water supply management area (DWSMA) is the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) approved surface and subsurface area surrounding a public water supply well that completely contains the scientifically calculated [[Glossary#W|wellhead protection area]] and is managed by the entity identified in a wellhead protection plan. The boundaries of the drinking water supply management area are delineated by identifiable physical features, landmarks or political and administrative boundaries.
 
 
 
===Links===
 
*The Minnesota Department of Health maintains [http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/maps/ maps], shapefiles and other information on source water protection in Minnesota, including maps of Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMAs).
 
*[http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/ Minnesota Department of Health Source Water Protection] main page
 
*http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/sourcewater/protection/index.cfm United States Environmental Protection Agency] Source Water protection page
 
*[http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/stormwater.pdf Evaluating Proposed Stormwater Infiltration Projects in Vulnerable Wellhead Protection Areas]
 
 
 
==Box 16==
 
Can a Local Government Unit (LGU) provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_17 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_58 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is the site located in a DWSMA, Wellhead Protection Area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well? - Answer: Yes
 
 
 
==Box 17==
 
Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure (e.g. rate control BMPs, utilities, buildings, roadway, easements) that make the Performance Goal not feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_18 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_21 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
 
*Is the site located in a DWSMA, wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
*Can a Local Government Unit (LGU) provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 18==
 
Is BMP relocation feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_21 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_19 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: - Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure (e.g. rate control BMPs, utilities, buildings, roadway, easements) that make the Performance Goal not feasible? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 19==
 
Is Flexible Treatment option (FTO) 1 feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_62 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_20 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation feasible? - '''Answer''': No
 
 
 
==Box 20==
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_54 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_10 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 1 feasible? - '''Answer''': No
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
 
 
==Box 21==
 
Is karst present on the site?
 
 
 
[[MIDS design sequence flow chart - Box 22|Yes]]
 
 
 
[[MIDS design sequence flow chart - Box 26|No]]
 
 
 
If you are unsure, we recommend you review the guidance for karst in this manual. To retain your place in this flowchart, either open the [http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Karst karst guidance] page in a new tab (right click on the link and select ''Open Link in New Tab''), use the back arrow after visiting the karst guidance page, or use the Breadcrumbs at the top of the page.
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
 
*Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make the performance goal not feasible? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
*Is BMP relocation feasible? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 22==
 
Can a local unit of government (LGU) provide a higher level of [[Karst#Investigation for karst areas|engineering review]] to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_26 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_23 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is karst present on the site? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 23==
 
Is BMP relocation onsite to a location without karst feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_26 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_24 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Can a local unit of government (LGU) provide a higher level of [[Karst#Investigation for karst areas|engineering review]] to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater? - '''Answer''': No
 
 
 
==Box 24==
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_25 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_10 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation onsite to a location without karst feasible? - '''Answer''': No
 
 
 
==Box 25==
 
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
 
 
 
Select Flexible treatment Option 2
 
 
 
*No infiltration practices allowed
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
*Provide soil borings or report from a professional geologist or geotechnical engineer
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
 
 
{{alert|Previous step:
 
It was determined that karst is present within 1000 feet of the site and the BMP cannot be reloacted so that it is more than 1000 feet from karst |alert-info}}
 
 
 
<font size=5>You have completed the flow chart</font size>
 
 
 
==Box 26==
 
Is shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock present on site?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_27 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_33 No]
 
 
 
If you are unsure, we recommend you review the guidance for shallow groundwater in this manual. To retain your place in this flowchart, either open the [http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Shallow_groundwater shallow groundwater guidance] page in a new tab (right click on the link and select ''Open Link in New Tab''), use the back arrow after visiting the shallow groundwater guidance page, or use the Breadcrumbs at the top of the page.
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
 
*Is karst present on the site? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
*Can a local unit of government (LGU) provide a higher level of [[Karst#Investigation for karst areas|engineering review]] to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater?- '''Answer''': Yes
 
or
 
*Is BMP relocation onsite to a location without karst feasible? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 27==
 
Conduct a detailed site investigation of [[Shallow groundwater|shallow groundwater]] or [[Shallow soils and shallow depth to bedrock#Investigation for shallow bedrock areas|shallow bedrock]]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_28 Next question]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock present on site? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 28==
 
Is there more than 3 feet of soil depth from bottom of BMP to bedrock or groundwater (more than 10 feet is preferred)?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_33 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_29 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS STEP: You were asked to conduct a detailed site investigation of [[Shallow groundwater|shallow groundwater]] or [[Shallow soils and shallow depth to bedrock#Investigation for shallow bedrock areas|shallow bedrock]]
 
 
 
==Box 29==
 
Is BMP relocation onsite to avoid shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_33 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_30 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is there more than 3 feet of soil depth from the bottom on the BMP to bedrock and groundwater (more than 10 feet is preferred)? - '''Answer''': No
 
 
 
==Box 30==
 
Can the BMP be raised?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_32 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_66 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation onsite to avoid shallow groundwater and shallow bedrock feasible? -
 
Answer: No
 
 
 
==Box 31==
 
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
 
 
 
Select Flexible treatment Option 2
 
*No infiltration practices allowed
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
*Provide soil borings or report from a professional geologist or geotechnical engineer
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
 
 
PREVIOUIS STEP: It was determined that shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock is present within 3 feet of the bottom of the BMP and the BMP cannot be relocated or raised in elevation to achieve a 3 foot or greater separation from bedrock or groundwater.
 
 
 
'''You have completed the flow chart'''
 
 
 
==Box 32==
 
Raise BMP enough to ensure 3 feet (preferably 10 feet) of soil between bottom of BMP and top of bedrock and groundwater
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_33 Proceed to Next Step]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER Can the BMP be raised? '''Answer''' - Yes
 
 
 
==Box 33==
 
Is there presence of contaminated soils and/or contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_34 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_36 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
 
*Is shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock present on the site? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
*Is there more than 3 feet of soil depth from the bottom of the BMP to bedrock and/or groundwater? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
or
 
*Is BMP relocation onsite to avoid shallow bedrock and/or shallow groundwater feasible? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
or
 
*Can the BMP be raised? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 34==
 
Can hotspot or contamination be isolated or remediated to mitigate risk of increased contamination?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_36 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_35 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is there presence of contaminated soils and/or contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 35==
 
[[File:stop sign.png|100 px|left|alt=image of stop sign]]
 
 
 
Select Flexible treatment Option 2
 
*No infiltration practices allowed
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
*Provide Phase I or II ESAs or other documentation of potential contamination or hotspot runoff
 
*Provide documentation of extent of contamination and remediation alternatives considered
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
 
 
PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that contaminated soil, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff is present on the site and cannot be isolated or mitigated.
 
 
 
'''You have completed the flow chart'''
 
 
 
==Box 36==
 
Are there very low infiltrating soils (less than 0.2 inches per hour) on site?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_37 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_42 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
 
*Is there presence of contaminated soils, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff on the site? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
*Can hotspot or contamination be isolated or remediated? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 37==
 
Is BMP relocation onsite to a higher-infiltrating location feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_42 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_38 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there very low infiltrating soils (less than 0.2 inches per hour) on site? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 38==
 
Can BMP be sized to drain dry within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_42 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_39 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation onsite to a higher-infiltrating location feasible? - '''Answer''': No
 
 
 
==Box 39==
 
Provide [[Soils with low infiltration capacity#Investigation for low infiltration capacity soils|soil boring or infiltration test results]] documenting low-infiltration soils.
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_40 Next question]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Can BMP be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)? '''Answer''': No
 
 
 
==Box 40==
 
Is Flexible Treatment Alternative No 1 feasible, allowing BMP to drain in 48 hours?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_59 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_41 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS STEP: You were asked to provide [[Soils with low infiltration capacity#Investigation for low infiltration capacity soils|soil boring or infiltration test results]] documenting low-infiltration soils.
 
 
 
==Box 41==
 
[[File:stop sign.png|150 px|left|alt=image of stop sign|<font size=3>You have completed the flow chart. Return to [[Flexible treatment options]]</font size>]]
 
 
 
Select Flexible treatment Option 2
 
*No infiltration practices allowed
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
*Provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting low-infiltration soils
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
 
 
PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that soils on the site have an infiltration rate of less than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to areas with a higher infiltration rate, and the BMP cannot be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)
 
 
 
You have completed the flow chart
 
 
 
==Box 42==
 
Are there very high infiltrating soils (more than 8 inches per hour) on site?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_43 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_46 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:
 
*Are there very low infiltrating soils (less than 0.2 inches per hour) present on site? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
*Is BMP relocation onsite to a higher-infiltrating location feasible? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
or
 
*Can BMP be sized to drain dry within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 43==
 
Is BMP relocation onsite to a lower-infiltrating location feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_46 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_44 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there very high infiltrating soils (more than 8 inches per hour) on site? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 44==
 
Can subgrade be modified to slow the rate of infiltration to less than 8 inches per hour?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_46 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_45 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation onsite to a lower-infiltrating location feasible? - '''Answer''': No
 
 
 
==Box 45==
 
[[File:stop sign.png|150 px|left|alt=image of stop sign|<font size=3>You have completed the flow chart. Return to [[Flexible treatment options]]</font size>]]
 
 
 
Select Flexible treatment Option 2
 
*No infiltration practices allowed
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
*Provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting high-infiltration soils
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER
 
{{alert|It was determined that soils on the site have an infiltration rate greater than 8 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to an area with an infiltration rate lower than 8 inches per hour, or the subgrade cannot be modified to slow the infiltration rate to less than 8 inches per hour
 
|alert-info}}
 
 
 
You have completed the flow chart
 
 
 
==Box 46==
 
Are there adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices (e.g. impacting perched wetland)?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_47 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_51 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there very high infiltrating soils (greater than 8 inches per hour) present on site)? - '''Answer''': No
 
or
 
*Is BMP relocation onsite to a lower infiltrating location feasible? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
or
 
*Can subgrade be modified to slow the rate of infiltration? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 47==
 
Can the BMP be relocated to avoid adverse hydrologic impacts?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_51 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_48 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices (e.g. impacting perched wetland)? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 48==
 
Would BMPs accomodating Flexible treatment option 1 avoid adverse hydrologic impacts?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_50 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_49 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Can the BMP be relocated to avoid adverse hydrologic impacts? - '''Answer''': No
 
 
 
==Box 49==
 
[[File:stop sign.png|150 px|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<font size=3>You have completed the flow chart. Return to [[Flexible treatment options]]</font size>]]
 
 
 
Select FTO Alternative No. 2
 
*Maximize infiltration BMPs to treat up to the 0.55 inch goal, if possible
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
*provide report documenting potential hydrologic impacts from infiltration on the site, prepared by a registered engineer, hydrologist, or wetland specialist
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
 
 
You have completed the flow chart
 
 
 
==Box 50==
 
[[File:stop sign.png|300 px|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<font size=3>You have completed the flow chart. Return to [[Flexible treatment options]]</font size>]]
 
 
 
Select FTO Alternative No. 1
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 1 (FTO #1)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve at least 0.55 inch volume reduction goal, and
 
#Remove 75 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of reloacting project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site
 
 
 
===Additional considerations===
 
*Maximize infiltration BMPs to treat more than 0.55 inch goal if possible
 
*If Flexible Treatment Option 1 was determined based on presence of low infiltrating soils, provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting low-infiltrating soils
 
*if Flexible Treatment Option 1 was determined based on presence of adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices, provide a report that documents the potential hydrologic impacts from infiltration on the site, prepared by a registered engineer, hydrologist, or wetlands specialist.
 
 
 
You have completed the flow chart
 
 
 
==Box 51==
 
[[File:stop sign.png|150 px|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<font size=3>You have completed the flow chart. Return to [[Flexible treatment options]]</font size>]]
 
 
 
Complete design using the following performance goals
 
*New development projects
 
**1.1 inches from new impervious surfaces
 
**Redevelopment projects - 1.1 inches from new impervious surfaces
 
*Linear projects
 
**0.55 inches of runoff from the new and fully reconstructed impervious surfaces
 
**1.1 inches of runoff from the net increase in impervious area
 
 
 
You have completed the flow chart
 
 
 
==Box 52==
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
*Zoning and land use requirements make [[Flexible treatment options#Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)|Flexible Treatment Option 2]] not feasible
 
and
 
*The BMP cannot be relocated to accommodate zoning and land use restrictions
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_10 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_53 No]
 
 
 
==Box 53==
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
*There are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make [[Flexible treatment options#Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)|Flexible Treatment Option 2]] not feasible
 
and
 
*BMP relocation is not feasible
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_10 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_63 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: You determined that Flexible Treatment Option 2 is feasible and there are no limitations resulting from zoning and land use requirements.
 
 
 
==Box 54==
 
Do any of the following conditions apply? (NOTE: If any condition applies, you do not need to answer the remaining questions.)
 
*The site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well, and infiltration is not allowed by the LGU
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_56 Yes]
 
 
 
*Karst is present within 1000 feet of the site and the BMP cannot be relocated so that it is more than 1000 feet from karst
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_25 Yes]
 
 
 
*Shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock is present within 3 feet of the bottom of the BMP and the BMP cannot be relocated or raised in elevation to achieve a 3 foot or greater separation from bedrock or groundwater
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_31 Yes]
 
 
 
*Contaminated soil, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff is present on the site and cannot be isolated or mitigated
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_35 Yes]
 
 
 
*Soils on the site have an infiltration rate of less than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to areas with a higher infiltration rate, and the BMP cannot be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_41 Yes]
 
 
 
*Soils on the site have an infiltration rate greater than 8 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to an area with an infiltration rate lower than 8 inches per hour, or the subgrade cannot be modified to slow the infiltration rate to less than 8 inches per hour
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_45 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_63 No]
 
 
 
==Box 55==
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
*There are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make FTO 2 not feasible
 
and
 
*BMP relocation is not feasible
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_10 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_56 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER
 
You determined that Flexible Treatment Option 2 is feasible and there are no limitations resulting from zoning and land use requirements.
 
 
 
==Box 56==
 
[[File:stop sign.png|150 px|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<font size=3>You have completed the flow chart. Return to [[Flexible treatment options]]</font size>]]
 
 
 
Select Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2
 
*No infiltration practices allowed
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices
 
*Provide DWSMA or well location map
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#options  considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project  elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
 
 
PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that the site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area or within 200 feet of a drinking water well and infiltration is not allowed by the LGU.
 
 
 
You have completed the flow chart
 
 
 
==Box 57==
 
Do any of the following conditions apply? (NOTE: If any condition applies, you do not need to answer the remaining questions.)
 
*The site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area or within 200 feet of a drinking water well and Can a Local Government Unit (LGU) provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater.
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_56 Yes]
 
*Karst is present within 1000 feet up-gradient or 100 feet down-gradient of the site, a local unit of government cannot provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater, and the BMP cannot be reloacted so that it is more than 1000 feet from karst.
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_25 Yes]
 
*Shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock is present within 3 feet of the bottom of the BMP and the BMP cannot be relocated or raised in elevation to achieve a 3 foot or greater separation from bedrock or groundwater.
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_31 Yes]
 
*Contaminated soil, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff is present on the site and cannot be isolated or mitigated
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_35 Yes]
 
*Soils on the site have an infiltration rate of less than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to areas with a higher infiltration rate, and the BMP cannot be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_41 Yes]
 
*Soils on the site have an infiltration rate greater than 8 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to an area with an infiltration rate lower than 8 inches per hour, or the subgrade cannot be modified to slow the infiltration rate to less than 8 inches per hour
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_45 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_52 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS STEP: You determined that flexible Treatment option 1 is feasible.
 
 
 
==Box 58==
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option 2 feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_56 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_10 No]
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
 
 
==Box 59==
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
*There are very high infiltrating soils (more than 8 inches per hour) on the site;
 
*BMP relocation to an area with lower infiltration rates is not feasible; and
 
*The subgrade cannot be modified to slow the rate to less than 8 inches per hour.
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_45 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_60 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is Flexible Treatment Alternative No 1 feasible, allowing BMP to drain in 48 hours? - '''Answer''': Yes
 
 
 
==Box 60==
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
*There are adverse hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices
 
*The BMP cannot be relocated to avoid adverse hydrologic impacts; and
 
*BMPs accomodating FTO 1 would avoid adverse hydrologic impacts
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_50 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_499 No]
 
 
 
==Box 61==
 
Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make [[Flexible treatment options#Flexible Treatment Option 1 (FTO #1)|Flexible Treatment Option 1]] not feasible?
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_20 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_62 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS STEP: You determined that flexible Treatment option 1 is feasible.
 
 
 
==Box 62==
 
Do any of the following conditions apply? (NOTE: If any condition applies, you do not need to answer the remaining questions.)
 
*The site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well, and a Local Government Unit (LGU) can provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater.
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_56 Yes]
 
*Karst is present within 1000 feet up-gradient or 100 feet down-gradient of the site, a local unit of government cannot provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater, and the BMP cannot be relocated so that it is more than 1000 feet from karst.
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_25 Yes]
 
*Shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock is present within 3 feet of the bottom of the BMP and the BMP cannot be relocated or raised in elevation to achieve a 3 foot or greater separation from bedrock or groundwater.
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_31 Yes]
 
*Contaminated soil, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff is present on the site and cannot be isolated or mitigated
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_35 Yes]
 
*Soils on the site have an infiltration rate of less than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to areas with a higher infiltration rate, and the BMP cannot be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_41 Yes]
 
*Soils on the site have an infiltration rate greater than 8 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to an area with an infiltration rate lower than 8 inches per hour, or the subgrade cannot be modified to slow the infiltration rate to less than 8 inches per hour
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_45 Yes]
 
*Soils on the site have an infiltration rate of less than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to areas with an infiltration rate greater than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams), and Flexible Treatment Option 1 is feasible.
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_60 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_60 No]
 
 
 
PREVIOUS STEP: You determined that Flexible Treatment Option 1 is feasible.
 
 
 
==Box 63==
 
Do the following conditions apply?
 
*There are adverse hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices; and
 
*The BMP cannot be relocated to avoid adverse hydrologic impacts
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_65 Yes]
 
 
 
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_64 No]
 
 
 
==Box 64==
 
[[File:stop sign.png|300 px|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<font size=3>You have completed the flow chart. Return to [[Flexible treatment options]]</font size>]]
 
 
 
Select Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2
 
*Provide  regulations and/or cost estimates  documenting infeasibility of meeting the original Performance goal
 
 
 
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
 
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project  elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
 
 
PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that
 
*there are no site conditions that prevent infiltration and there are no adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices, but
 
**there are zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible; or
 
**there are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible.
 
 
 
You have completed the flow chart
 
 
 
==Box 65==
 
[[File:stop sign.png|150 px|thumb|alt=image of stop sign|<font size=3>You have completed the flow chart. Return to [[Flexible treatment options]]</font size>]]
 
 
 
Select Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2
 
 
 
 
*Provide regulations and/or cost estimates  documenting infeasibility of meeting the original Performance goal;
 
*Provide regulations and/or cost estimates  documenting infeasibility of meeting the original Performance goal;
*Maximize infiltration BMPs to treat up to the 0.55 inch goal, if possible;
 
*Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices; and
 
 
*Provide report documenting potential hydrologic impacts from infiltration on the site, prepared by a registered engineer, hydrologist, or wetland specialist
 
*Provide report documenting potential hydrologic impacts from infiltration on the site, prepared by a registered engineer, hydrologist, or wetland specialist
  
===Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)===
+
'''PREVIOUS STEP''': It was determined that
Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:
 
#Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
 
#Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
 
#options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
 
 
 
PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that
 
 
*there are no site conditions that prevent infiltration but
 
*there are no site conditions that prevent infiltration but
 
**there are adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices and BMP relocation is not feasible; and
 
**there are adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices and BMP relocation is not feasible; and
Line 1,697: Line 952:
 
**there are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible.
 
**there are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible.
  
You have completed the flow chart
+
==Step 66==
 +
[[File:Return to top.png|25px|thumb|alt=arrow image|[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart Top]]]
  
==Box 66==
 
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
 
Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?
  
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_31 Yes]
+
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_31 Yes]
 +
 
 +
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Step_10 No]
  
[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=MIDS_design_sequence_flow_chart#Box_10 No]
+
'''PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER''': Can the BMP be raised? - '''Answer''': No
  
PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Can the BMP be raised? - '''Answer''': No
+
[[Category:Level 2 - Management/MIDS]]
-->
 

Latest revision as of 03:14, 25 February 2023

image of Minimal Impact Design Standards logo
For more information on the Design Sequence Flow Chart see the following:
*Flexible treatment options
*MIDS flow chart
*List of steps in flow chart
image of flow chart used for wiki
Click on image to enlarge. Note the steps in this image may differ from the steps described on this page.

A flow chart was developed to determine the appropriate performance goal or Flexible Treatment Option for a new development, redevelopment, or linear site. You may access a pdf version of the flow chart (File:Final MIDS Flow chart.pdf) or follow the flow chart through the sequence of questions starting at Step 1 below. If you would like a copy of the flowchart in Visio, so that you can edit it, please contact us.

The wiki version of the flow chart, which starts below at Step 1, takes you through a series of questions and steps to ultimately arrive at a performance goal. The wiki version does not necessarily take you through each step nor does it completely match the pdf version of the flow chart. However, the sequence of questions and answers takes you to the same result.

Two advantages of using the wiki version on this page are that 1) the path through questions and answers is straightforward and 2) there are links, discussions, and images to assist you in answering questions.

Step 1

Did you gather the site information necessary to proceed through the flow chart?

Yes

No or Unsure

Step 2

Prior to using the flow chart, gather the following preliminary information.

  • Conduct site review
  • Define performance goal

Conduct site review

PROCEED TO THE NEXT STEP

Step 3

photo of impervious surfaces
Impervious surfaces includes roads, roofs, sidewalks, and parking lots.
  • New and redevelopment projects: Retain on site a volume of 1.1 inches from impervious surfaces
  • Linear projects: Retain on site the larger of 1.1 inches from all new or 0.55 inches from all new and fully reconstructed impervious surfaces

PROCEED TO THE FIRST QUESTION

Links

Step 4

Does project create one acre or more of new and/or fully reconstructed impervious surfaces?

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: The previous question defined the performance goals.

Step 5

image of stop sign
You have completed the flow chart

MIDS PERFORMANCE GOAL DOES NOT APPLY

The project creates less than 1 acre of impervious surface.

You have completed the flow chart.

Return to Minimal Impact Design Standards main page

Return to Design Sequence Flowchart-Flexible treatment options

Step 6

image of linear projects
Example of a linear project where site constraints likely do not exist (left) and do exist (right)

Is the project linear?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Does project create one acre or more of new and/or fully reconstructed impervious surfaces? Answer - Yes

Step 7

Are there constraints due to lack of available ROW, off site drainage and/or rate control requirements?

Yes

No

Step 8

Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there restraints due to lack of available right-of-way, off-site drainage, and/or rate control requirements? Answer: Yes

Step 9

image of stop sign
You have completed the flowchart

Select Flexible treatment Option 2

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. No infiltration practices allowed, and
  2. Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
  3. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  4. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  5. Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.

Provide the following information

  • Documentation of offsite runon to project area
  • Documentation of lack of right-of-way

PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that the site is linear, there are constraints due to lack of right-of-way or off/site drainage and/or rate control requirements, and a reasonable effort to acquire all of the right-of-way cannot be made.

Step 10

image of stop sign
You have completed the flow chart

Select Flexible Treatment Option 3 Off-site mitigation (including banking or cash or treatment on another project, as determined by the local authority) equivalent to the volume reduction performance goal can be used in areas selected in the following order of preference:

  1. Locations that yield benefits to the same receiving water that receives runoff from the original construction activity.
  2. Locations within the same Department of Natural Resources (DNR) catachment area as the original construction activity.
  3. Locations in the next adjacent DNR catchment area up-stream.
  4. Locations anywhere within the local authority's jurisdiction.

PREVIOUS QUESTION: It was determined that Flexible Treatment Option 2 is not feasible.

Step 11

Are there zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:

  • Is the project linear? Answer: No

or

  • Are there constraints due to lack of available ROW, off site drainage and/or rate control requirements? Answer: No

Step 12

Is BMP relocation feasible

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible? Answer: Yes

Step 13

Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 1 feasible?

Yes

No

Flexible Treatment Option 1 (FTO #1)

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. Achieve at least 0.55 inch volume reduction goal, and
  2. Remove 75 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  3. Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation feasible - Answer: No

Step 14

Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?

Yes

No

Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  2. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  3. options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 1 feasible? - Answer: No

Step 15

map of DWSMAs in Minnesota
Map illustrating location of Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMAs) in Minnesota.

Is the site located in a DWSMA (Drinking Water Supply Management Area), wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well?

Yes

No

Discussion

A drinking water supply management area (DWSMA) is the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) approved surface and subsurface area surrounding a public water supply well that completely contains the scientifically calculated wellhead protection area and is managed by the entity identified in a wellhead protection plan. The boundaries of the drinking water supply management area are delineated by identifiable physical features, landmarks or political and administrative boundaries.

Links

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER

  • Are there zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible? - Answer: No

or

  • Is BMP relocation feasible? - Answer: Yes

Step 16

Can a Local Government Unit (LGU) provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is the site located in a DWSMA, Wellhead Protection Area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well? - Answer: Yes

Step 17

Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure (e.g. rate control BMPs, utilities, buildings, roadway, easements) that make the Performance Goal not feasible?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER

  • Is the site located in a DWSMA, wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well? - Answer: No

or

  • Can a Local Government Unit (LGU) provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater? - Answer: Yes

Step 18

Is BMP relocation feasible?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: - Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure (e.g. rate control BMPs, utilities, buildings, roadway, easements) that make the Performance Goal not feasible? - Answer: Yes

Step 19

Is Flexible Treatment option (FTO) 1 feasible?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation feasible? - Answer: No

Step 20

Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 1 feasible? - Answer: No

Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  2. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  3. options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.

Step 21

Is karst present on the site?

Yes

No

If you are unsure, we recommend you review the guidance for karst in this manual. To retain your place in this flowchart, either open the karst guidance page in a new tab (right click on the link and select Open Link in New Tab), use the back arrow after visiting the karst guidance page, or use the Breadcrumbs at the top of the page.

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:

  • Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make the performance goal not feasible? - Answer: No

or

  • Is BMP relocation feasible? - Answer: Yes

Step 22

Can a local unit of government (LGU) provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is karst present on the site? - Answer: Yes

Step 23

Is BMP relocation onsite to a location without karst feasible?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Can a local unit of government (LGU) provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater? - Answer: No

Step 24

Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation onsite to a location without karst feasible? - Answer: No

Step 25

image of stop sign
You have completed the flow chart

Select Flexible treatment Option 2

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. No infiltration practices allowed, and
  2. Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
  3. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  4. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  5. Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.

Provide the following information

  • Provide soil borings or report from a professional geologist or geotechnical engineer

Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  2. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  3. options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.

PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that karst is present within 1000 feet of the site and the BMP cannot be reloacted so that it is more than 1000 feet from karst

Step 26

Is shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock present on site?

Yes

No

If you are unsure, we recommend you review the guidance for shallow groundwater in this manual. To retain your place in this flowchart, either open the shallow groundwater guidance page in a new tab (right click on the link and select Open Link in New Tab), use the back arrow after visiting the shallow groundwater guidance page, or use the Breadcrumbs at the top of the page.

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:

  • Is karst present on the site? - Answer: No

or

  • Can a local unit of government (LGU) provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater?- Answer: Yes

or

  • Is BMP relocation onsite to a location without karst feasible? - Answer: Yes

Step 27

Conduct a detailed site investigation of shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock

Next question

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock present on site? - Answer: Yes

Step 28

Is there more than 3 feet of soil depth from bottom of BMP to bedrock or groundwater (more than 10 feet is preferred)?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS STEP: You were asked to conduct a detailed site investigation of shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock

Step 29

Is BMP relocation onsite to avoid shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock feasible?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is there more than 3 feet of soil depth from the bottom on the BMP to bedrock and groundwater (more than 10 feet is preferred)? - Answer: No

Step 30

Can the BMP be raised?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation onsite to avoid shallow groundwater and shallow bedrock feasible? - Answer: No

Step 31

image of stop sign
You have completed the flow chart

Select Flexible treatment Option 2

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. No infiltration practices allowed, and
  2. Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
  3. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  4. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  5. Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.

Provide the following information

  • Soil borings or report from a professional geologist or geotechnical engineer

PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock is present within 3 feet of the bottom of the BMP and the BMP cannot be relocated or raised in elevation to achieve a 3 foot or greater separation from bedrock or groundwater.

Step 32

Raise BMP enough to ensure 3 feet (preferably 10 feet) of soil between bottom of BMP and top of bedrock and groundwater

Proceed to Next Step

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Can the BMP be raised? Answer - Yes

Step 33

Is there presence of contaminated soils and/or contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:

  • Is shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock present on the site? - Answer: No

or

  • Is there more than 3 feet of soil depth from the bottom of the BMP to bedrock and/or groundwater? - Answer: Yes

or

  • Is BMP relocation onsite to avoid shallow bedrock and/or shallow groundwater feasible? - Answer: Yes

or

  • Can the BMP be raised? - Answer: Yes

Step 34

Can hotspot or contamination be isolated or remediated to mitigate risk of increased contamination?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is there presence of contaminated soils and/or contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff? - Answer: Yes

Step 35

image of stop sign
You have completed the flow chart

Select Flexible treatment Option 2

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. No infiltration practices allowed, and
  2. Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
  3. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  4. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  5. Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.

Provide the following information

  • Provide Phase I or II ESAs or other documentation of potential contamination or hotspot runoff
  • Provide documentation of extent of contamination and remediation alternatives considered

PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that contaminated soil, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff is present on the site and cannot be isolated or mitigated.

Step 36

Are there very low infiltrating soils (less than 0.2 inches per hour) on site?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:

  • Is there presence of contaminated soils, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff on the site? - Answer: No

or

  • Can hotspot or contamination be isolated or remediated? - Answer: Yes

Step 37

Is BMP relocation onsite to a higher-infiltrating location feasible?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there very low infiltrating soils (less than 0.2 inches per hour) on site? - Answer: Yes

Step 38

Can BMP be sized to drain dry within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation onsite to a higher-infiltrating location feasible? - Answer: No

Step 39

Provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting low-infiltration soils.

Next question

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Can BMP be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)? Answer: No

Step 40

Is Flexible Treatment Alternative No 1 feasible, allowing BMP to drain in 48 hours?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS STEP: You were asked to provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting low-infiltration soils.

Step 41

image of stop sign
You have completed the flow chart

Select Flexible treatment Option 2

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. No infiltration practices allowed, and
  2. Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
  3. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  4. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  5. Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.

Provide the following information

  • Provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting low-infiltration soils

PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that soils on the site have an infiltration rate of less than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to areas with a higher infiltration rate, and the BMP cannot be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)

Step 42

Are there very high infiltrating soils (more than 8 inches per hour) on site?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER:

  • Are there very low infiltrating soils (less than 0.2 inches per hour) present on site? - Answer: No

or

  • Is BMP relocation onsite to a higher-infiltrating location feasible? - Answer: Yes

or

  • Can BMP be sized to drain dry within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)? - Answer: Yes

Step 43

Is BMP relocation onsite to a lower-infiltrating location feasible?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there very high infiltrating soils (more than 8 inches per hour) on site? - Answer: Yes

Step 44

Can subgrade be modified to slow the rate of infiltration to less than 8 inches per hour?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is BMP relocation onsite to a lower-infiltrating location feasible? - Answer: No

Step 45

image of stop sign
You have completed the flow chart

Select Flexible treatment Option 2

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. No infiltration practices allowed, and
  2. Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
  3. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  4. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  5. Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.

Provide the following information

  • Provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting high-infiltration soils

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: It was determined that soils on the site have an infiltration rate greater than 8 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to an area with an infiltration rate lower than 8 inches per hour, or the subgrade cannot be modified to slow the infiltration rate to less than 8 inches per hour

Step 46

Are there adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices (e.g. impacting perched wetland)?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there very high infiltrating soils (greater than 8 inches per hour) present on site)? - Answer: No or

  • Is BMP relocation onsite to a lower infiltrating location feasible? - Answer: Yes

or

  • Can subgrade be modified to slow the rate of infiltration? - Answer: Yes

Step 47

Can the BMP be relocated to avoid adverse hydrologic impacts?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Are there adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices (e.g. impacting perched wetland)? - Answer: Yes

Step 48

Would BMPs accomodating Flexible treatment option 1 avoid adverse hydrologic impacts?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Can the BMP be relocated to avoid adverse hydrologic impacts? - Answer: No

Step 49

image of stop sign
You have completed the flow chart

Select Flexible treatment Option 2

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. Maximize infiltration BMPs to treat up to the 0.55 inch goal, if possible, and
  2. Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
  3. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  4. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  5. Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.

Provide the following information

  • provide report documenting potential hydrologic impacts from infiltration on the site, prepared by a registered engineer, hydrologist, or wetland specialist

Step 50

image of stop sign
You have completed the flow chart
Select Flexible Treatment Option 1 (FTO #1)

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions

  1. Achieve at least 0.55 inch volume reduction goal, and
  2. Remove 75 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  3. Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of reloacting project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site

Additional considerations

  • Maximize infiltration BMPs to treat more than 0.55 inch goal if possible
  • If Flexible Treatment Option 1 was determined based on presence of low infiltrating soils, provide soil boring or infiltration test results documenting low-infiltrating soils
  • if Flexible Treatment Option 1 was determined based on presence of adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices, provide a report that documents the potential hydrologic impacts from infiltration on the site, prepared by a registered engineer, hydrologist, or wetlands specialist.

Step 51

image of stop sign
You have completed the flow chart

Complete design using the following performance goals

New development projects

  • 1.1 inches from new impervious surfaces
  • Redevelopment projects - 1.1 inches from new impervious surfaces

Linear projects

  • 0.55 inches of runoff from the new and fully reconstructed impervious surfaces
  • 1.1 inches of runoff from the net increase in impervious area

Step 52

Do the following conditions apply?

and

  • The BMP cannot be relocated to accommodate zoning and land use restrictions

Yes

No

Step 53

Do the following conditions apply?

and

  • BMP relocation is not feasible

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: You determined that Flexible Treatment Option 2 is feasible and there are no limitations resulting from zoning and land use requirements.

Step 54

Do any of the following conditions apply? (NOTE: If any condition applies, you do not need to answer the remaining questions.)

  • The site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well, and infiltration is not allowed by the LGU

Yes

  • Karst is present within 1000 feet of the site and the BMP cannot be relocated so that it is more than 1000 feet from karst

Yes

  • Shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock is present within 3 feet of the bottom of the BMP and the BMP cannot be relocated or raised in elevation to achieve a 3 foot or greater separation from bedrock or groundwater

Yes

  • Contaminated soil, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff is present on the site and cannot be isolated or mitigated

Yes

  • Soils on the site have an infiltration rate of less than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to areas with a higher infiltration rate, and the BMP cannot be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)

Yes

  • Soils on the site have an infiltration rate greater than 8 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to an area with an infiltration rate lower than 8 inches per hour, or the subgrade cannot be modified to slow the infiltration rate to less than 8 inches per hour

Yes

No

Step 55

Do the following conditions apply?

  • There are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make FTO 2 not feasible

and

  • BMP relocation is not feasible

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: You determined that Flexible Treatment Option 2 is feasible and there are no limitations resulting from zoning and land use requirements.

Step 56

image of stop sign
You have completed the flow chart

Select Flexible treatment Option 2

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. No infiltration practices allowed, and
  2. Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
  3. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  4. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  5. Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.
  • No infiltration practices allowed
  • Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices

Provide the foillowing information

  • Provide DWSMA or well location map

PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that the site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area or within 200 feet of a drinking water well and infiltration is not allowed by the LGU.

Step 57

Do any of the following conditions apply? (NOTE: If any condition applies, you do not need to answer the remaining questions.)

  • The site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area or within 200 feet of a drinking water well and Can a Local Government Unit (LGU) provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater.

Yes

  • Karst is present within 1000 feet up-gradient or 100 feet down-gradient of the site, a local unit of government cannot provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater, and the BMP cannot be reloacted so that it is more than 1000 feet from karst.

Yes

  • Shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock is present within 3 feet of the bottom of the BMP and the BMP cannot be relocated or raised in elevation to achieve a 3 foot or greater separation from bedrock or groundwater.

Yes

  • Contaminated soil, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff is present on the site and cannot be isolated or mitigated

Yes

  • Soils on the site have an infiltration rate of less than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to areas with a higher infiltration rate, and the BMP cannot be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)

Yes

  • Soils on the site have an infiltration rate greater than 8 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to an area with an infiltration rate lower than 8 inches per hour, or the subgrade cannot be modified to slow the infiltration rate to less than 8 inches per hour

Yes

No

PREVIOUS STEP: You determined that flexible Treatment option 1 is feasible.

Step 58

Is Flexible Treatment Option 2 feasible?

Yes

No

Flexible Treatment Option 2 (FTO #2)

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  2. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  3. options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.

Step 59

Do the following conditions apply?

  • There are very high infiltrating soils (more than 8 inches per hour) on the site;
  • BMP relocation to an area with lower infiltration rates is not feasible; and
  • The subgrade cannot be modified to slow the rate to less than 8 inches per hour.

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Is Flexible Treatment Alternative No 1 feasible, allowing BMP to drain in 48 hours? - Answer: Yes

Step 60

Do the following conditions apply?

  • There are adverse hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices
  • The BMP cannot be relocated to avoid adverse hydrologic impacts; and
  • BMPs accomodating FTO 1 would avoid adverse hydrologic impacts

Yes

No

Step 61

Are there existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make Flexible Treatment Option 1 not feasible?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS STEP: You determined that flexible Treatment option 1 is feasible.

Step 62

Do any of the following conditions apply? (NOTE: If any condition applies, you do not need to answer the remaining questions.)

  • The site is located within a DWSMA, wellhead protection area, or within 200 feet of a drinking water well, and a Local Government Unit (LGU) can provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater.

Yes

  • Karst is present within 1000 feet up-gradient or 100 feet down-gradient of the site, a local unit of government cannot provide a higher level of engineering review to ensure a functioning system that prevents adverse impacts to groundwater, and the BMP cannot be relocated so that it is more than 1000 feet from karst.

Yes

  • Shallow groundwater or shallow bedrock is present within 3 feet of the bottom of the BMP and the BMP cannot be relocated or raised in elevation to achieve a 3 foot or greater separation from bedrock or groundwater.

Yes

  • Contaminated soil, contaminated groundwater, or hotspot runoff is present on the site and cannot be isolated or mitigated

Yes

  • Soils on the site have an infiltration rate of less than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to areas with a higher infiltration rate, and the BMP cannot be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams)

Yes

  • Soils on the site have an infiltration rate greater than 8 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to an area with an infiltration rate lower than 8 inches per hour, or the subgrade cannot be modified to slow the infiltration rate to less than 8 inches per hour

Yes

  • Soils on the site have an infiltration rate of less than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be relocated to areas with an infiltration rate greater than 0.2 inches per hour, the BMP cannot be sized to drain within 48 hours (24 hours in locations that are tributary to trout streams), and Flexible Treatment Option 1 is feasible.

Yes

No

PREVIOUS STEP: You determined that Flexible Treatment Option 1 is feasible.

Step 63

Do the following conditions apply?

  • There are adverse hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices; and
  • The BMP cannot be relocated to avoid adverse hydrologic impacts

Yes

No

Step 64

image of stop sign
You have completed the flow chart

Select Flexible treatment Option 2

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. No infiltration practices allowed, and
  2. Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
  3. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  4. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  5. Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.

Provide the following information

  • Provide regulations and/or cost estimates documenting infeasibility of meeting the original Performance goal

PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that there are no site conditions that prevent infiltration and there are no adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices, but

  • there are zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible; or
  • there are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible.

Step 65

image of stop sign
You have completed the flow chart

Select Flexible treatment Option 2

Applicant attempts to comply with the following conditions:

  1. Maximize infiltration BMPs to treat up to the 0.55 inch goal, if possible and
  2. Explore non-infiltration volume reduction practices, and
  3. Achieve volume reduction to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the Local Authority), and
  4. Remove 60 percent of the annual total phosphorus load, and
  5. Options considered and presented shall examine the merits of relocating project elements to address varying soil conditions and other constraints across the site.

Provide the following information

  • Provide regulations and/or cost estimates documenting infeasibility of meeting the original Performance goal;
  • Provide report documenting potential hydrologic impacts from infiltration on the site, prepared by a registered engineer, hydrologist, or wetland specialist

PREVIOUS STEP: It was determined that

  • there are no site conditions that prevent infiltration but
    • there are adverse surface water hydrologic impacts from infiltration practices and BMP relocation is not feasible; and
    • there are zoning and land use requirements that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible; or
    • there are existing or proposed structures or infrastructure that make the Performance Goal not feasible and BMP relocation is not feasible.

Step 66

Is Flexible Treatment Option (FTO) 2 feasible?

Yes

No

PREVIOUS QUESTION and ANSWER: Can the BMP be raised? - Answer: No

This page was last edited on 25 February 2023, at 03:14.