6.4. SR 04-20-1998Memorandum
ITEM 6.4.
· TO:
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM:
STEPHEN ROHLF, BUILDING
& ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: APRIL 20, 1998
SUBJECT: LAKE ORONO IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT CU 98-6
REQUEST
The City of Elk River is requesting a conditional use permit to excavate approximately
115,000 cubic yards of sediment from Lake Orono and dispose of it on sites adjacent to
the lake.
A conditional use permit is required for the described work by Section 900.31 of the City
of Elk River Code of Ordinances titled, Excavation, Grading and Filling. Subsection 5 of
the referenced ordinance requires a conditional use permit to excavate in any wetland that
encompasses more than one parcel. In addition, the extraction of materials in the
floodway and the disposal of more than 1,000 cubic yards of material in floodfringe also
requires a conditional use permit (Section 902 of the City of Elk River Code of
Ordinances titled, Floodplain Management Ordinance).
ATTACHMENTS
The Feasibility Study for Lake Orono Sediment Removal Improvement contained a
proposed project schedule and site plans of the disposal areas. The Council has already
received this feasibility study with the information listed, but if you need any of these
items, please let staff know.
Other attachments include:
· Map #1 - sediment deposits as determined by aerial photos taken in October of 1997
and areas recommended for improvement.
· Map #2 - areas of the lake considered for improvement.
· Map #3 - vicinity map of the proposed disposal sites.
· Map #4 - an aerial photo of the Tim Smith property disposal site.
· Lake Orono Improvement Project Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW).
· Comment on the EAW from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), dated
March 20, 1998 and staff's response dated April 8, 1998.
· Comment on the EAW from the Minnesota Historical Society, dated March 30, 1998
and staff's response to the US Army Corps of Engineers, dated April 3, 1998.
· Resolution regarding the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
be from this area to restore it to its original navigable depth and act as a basin for
future sedimentation.
Area N - Area "N" is the portion of the Elk River immediately upstream of Lake
Orono. Creating a sedimentation basin in this area to limit the amount of sediment
finding its way to Area "L" was considered. Because it is difficult to go deep enough
and/or wide enough in this area to significantly slow the river water, Area "L" was
ruled out as a location for a sedimentation basin.
Material in Area "N" that will quickly deposit in the lake after sediment is removed
from Area "L" will be excavated as part of the project. Removal of this sediment also
allows for better access up river. A combined total of 90,000 cubic yards is proposed
to be removed from Areas "L" and "N" with the bulk of material coming from Area
Area K - This area is basically a sand bar jetting out from Boy Scout Island that is a
safety hazard for boating. This area is proposed to be made a minimum of 3 feet deep
by the removal of 3,500 cubic yards of material.
Area C - For boating safety, like is the case with Area "K", 13,500 cubic yards of
material is proposed to be removed, making this area a minimum of 3 feet deep.
Erosion on adjacent Cemetery Point is proposed to be corrected as part of the project.
Area I - A small access channel 3 feet deep and 48 feet wide is proposed in the
extreme northwest comer of this area. Sediment from an adjacent storm sewer outlet
will also be taken. Approximately 2,000 cubic yards of material is proposed to be
removed from Area 'T'.
Area J - This is an optional area. Creating a minimum 3 foot depth in areas of the
lake that get a lot of watercraft traffic was one of the rationales used to determining
where sediment should be removed. Except for the portions of this area that are in
close proximity to islands, the area has little for sediment deposits that are shallower
than 3 feet. However, there are some high spots in this areas. Removal of the
sediment from this area is difficult due to the need to cross the river channel running
through the lake. Leveling the high spots in this area and leaving the material in the
lake has been proposed as an alternative (approximately 6,000 cubic yards of
grading).
Disposal Sites
Map # 3 shows the general location of the disposal sites. Areas adjacent to the lake were
selected as disposal sites to avoid the cost of reloading the sediment into on-road trucks
and tracking the material away. Detailed maps of the disposal sites were provided in the
lake improvement feasibility study.
The altered drainage of the disposal sites has been well addressed as has erosion control
measures. No work, other than 20 foot wide access roads from the lake, is proposed to
take place within the 50 foot shore impact zone (within 50 feet of the lake).
The city is responsible for dealing with drainage and odor complaints as well as the
placement and maintenance of erosion control measures for the first year. The sediment
has been tested and does not contain contaminates of concern.
Top soil will be removed from the disposal sites, the bearing capabilities of the soil
remaining will be verified and documented, sediment will then be placed on the sites
according to the plans, top soil replaced, and the sites will be immediately seeded and
mulched. The sediment placed on the Bickman, Hartman and Wapiti Park sites will
contain 2% or less organic matter because they have the potential for development.
There is a potential stockpile of material proposed in the southeast comer of the Bickman
disposal site. Mr. Bickman is willing to take this material and offer it for sale. This
stockpile is proposed adjacent to the roadway for access. It is unlikely that there will be a
need for the stockpile, but it should be considered as part of the city's request.
The Tim Smith property disposal site, shown on Map #4, has been added in case the
Island View disposal site does not work out. The Island View site has limited area
adjacent to the lake for disposal of sediment and possibly a reluctant property owner. The
estimated project cost in the feasibility study does include the cost of tracking material
away from the Island View site. The 2,000 cubic yards of sediment that was proposed for
the Island View site would cover an area approximately 200 feet by 250 feet by 1 foot
deep on the Smith property.
The Smith site is close to a DNR protected stream, but the DNR indicated that with
proper erosion control they were not worried about the use of the site. Mr. Smith's
property has been farmed in the past and he plans to use it for a tree farm. Drainage from
the disposal on the Smith site can be directed to nearby wetlands and will not affect any
residences.
In addition, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) believes the Island View and
Orono Cemetery disposal sites have significant potential for archaeological sites. A
Phase I archaeological survey will be conducted on the Orono Cemetery site, but staff is
arguing the logic of the Island View site having significant archaeological potential with
SHPO.
Wetlands on the disposal site also need to be delineated to determine that none are
affected by the sediment disposal. This was not done earlier because of snow cover.
Environmental Concerns
The attached EAW explains in detail the environmental issues and mitigation measures
associated with the proposed project. These issues will not be reiterated in this memo.
The Council is encouraged to review the EAW. The comment period for the EAW ended
on March 25, 1998. The city receive only one comment on the EAW. That comment
was from the Department of Natural Resource (DNR) and is attached to this memo.
In addition, the city has had the DNR, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA),
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Minnesota Board of Water and Soil
Resources (BSWR), and Sherbume County Soil and Water Conservation District
(SWCD) involved with the project for over two years. The concems of the referenced
agencies have been included in the project's design. The project has also been explained
to Sherbume County and the Elk River Watershed Board.
Shoreland Ordinance
The City's Shoreland Ordinance identifies considerations and conditions for grading in a
wetland and Shoreland District; most notably Sections 904.08 3. B. iv. a. and 904.08 7.
A. & B. None of the sediment disposal is proposed is within the Shore Impact Zone and
erosion control measures will be implemented. The project as proposed clearly meets the
standards and conditions set forth in the Shoreland Ordinance.
Floodplain
The Lake Orono Improvement Project will obviously involve work within the floodway
limits of the lake and river. Floodway is that portion of the floodplain where obstruction
that may impede flood waters are not allowed. Section 902 4.D.iii of the Elk River Code
of Ordinances does allow an exception for the temporary storage of dredge spoils that
assures removal of materials from the floodway based on flood warning time available.
August through October was picked as the time period for the project partly because of
typical low rain fall. The flood potential is extremely low during this period of the year.
The material that will be temporarily stored with in the floodway limits comes from the
lake in the first place and will not limit the lakes potential to store runoff. In addition, the
lake will be drained during the project, further adding to its potential holding capacity for
flood waters.
The only foreseeable issue is that the river diversion at the mouth of the Elk River could
possibly impede flood waters. In the unlikely event that there is a flood hazard during the
time period that the project is conducted, the river diversion can be quickly altered to
avoid obstructing flood waters, thus meeting the exception in Section 902 4.D.iii.
Recommendation
Lake Orono is a aesthetic, recreation, and economic resource for the entire community.
Keeping the lake as a resource is consistent with the Master Park Plan and the City of Elk
River's Comprehensive Plan. The design of the project more than adequately addresses
any environmental concerns and meets the standards in the City of Elk River Code of
Ordinances (Shoreland, Floodplain, Excavation, and Conditional Use Permits). The Lake
owners are apparently willing to pay for a major portion of the cost of this project at this
time and appropriate lands adjacent to the lake are currently available for the disposal of
sediment. Now is the time to do this project.
However, no permits can be issued for the project prior to the completion of the
environmental review process. Staff feels that the EAW process did not identify any
issues with the potential for significant environmental effects. Further, what
environmental effects could result from the project are not irreversible and can be
controlled and mitigated by the ongoing regulatory authority of the MPCA, DNR, and
USACE. Staff recommends the Council makes a negative declaration on the need
for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for this project. A resolution
regarding the need for an EIS is attached.
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed lake improvement project on March
24, 1998, considered the public testimony given at that meeting, and are recommending
approval of the project. Staff is also recommending approval of the described Lake
Orono Improvement Project under the following stipulations:
1. That archaeological issues are resolved on the Orono Cemetery and Island View
disposal sites.
2. The city's approval is contingent on the issuance of the following other permits:
· Protected Waters Permit by the DNR
· Water Appropriation Permit by the DNR
· Individual USACE Permit
· Water Quality Certification (401) by MPCA
· State Disposal System Permit by MPCA
· National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit by MPCA
3. The wetlands are delineated on the disposal sites and none are affected by the project.
4. An EIS is not required.
I_1
ISLANDS TO REI4AIN
OP~ONAL
AREA
CY)
WILLOWS
~VED
U, $:'-- HI G H WA:'(~~
COUNTY
BUSINESS CENTER DRI ~ FAIR
0 500 ~
~ z
~ GROUNDS
REVISED 2/11/98 ~o
CONSTRUCTION NOTES
AL! /~REAS U~ '.vor~x .'OflE [;or ?,H,~DCD Stix, E_' REMAIH tJIiEYCAVATED
! Er) 2 [EE~ OF kbtlER!/-~ !0 E]~ qFMOL, E/D Fo MAKE 4VERAGE WAFER DEPIH 5 FEET
LAKEI
SOFTBALL
PARK
CITY
HALL
LEGEND
ORONO
CEMETERY
EXPOSED SEDIMENT DEPOSITS WHEN LAKE
WAS LOWERED 2 FT. BELOW NORMAL
EXPOSED SEDIMENT DEPOSITS WHEN LAKE
WAS LOWERED 4 FT. BELOW NORMAL
SEE CONST. NOTE NO. 3
AREA IV
500 CY)
ORONO
MAP # 1
~J2g
MAP #2
LEGEND'D
BRIDCE
UNITED STATES HIGHWAY
J iI
?
?
8
MAP #2
29 ] 28
32 I 33
I
I
I
I
I
9
?
ALTERNATE DISPOSAL SITE
TIM SMITH PROPERTY
(2,000 CY)
BICKMAN
51.500
PARK
)PERTY
41,,500 CY)
HARTMAN
PROPERTY
-(17,ooo
i~USINI e~o~sos
ISLAND
PROPERTY
(2,~ O0 Cy)
LAKEF
I
ORONO
CEMETAR
PROPERTY
(13,500 CY)
MAF #3
NO SCALE J
LEGEND
DENOTES PROPOSED FILL SITE
''''''I'I- DENOTES 20FT. WIDE ACCESS ROAD
zn"z
on<~
MAP ~
ALTER~tATVE DISPOSAL STE
,2ITCH 28
!NR T~IEUTAP,'f STREAM
!_.'-' ;< E ZRCNC'
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW)
NOTE TO PREPARERS
This worksheet is to be completed by the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGLO or its agents. The project
proposer must supply any reasonably accessible data necessary for the worksheet, but is not to complete
the final worksheet itself. Ifa complete answer does not fit in the space allotted, attach sheets as necessary.
For assistance with this worksheet contact the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) at (612)
296-8253 or (toll-fi'ce) 1-800-652-9747 (ask operator for the EQB environmental review program) or
consult" EAW Guidelines," a booklet available from the EQB.
NOTE TO REVIEWERS
Comments must be submitted to the RGU (see item 3) during the 30-day comment period following notice
of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. (Contact the RGU or the EQB to learn when the comment period ends.)
Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the information, potential impacts that may
warrant further investigation, and the need for an EIS. If the EAW has been prepared for the scoping of an
EIS (see item 4), comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the information and suggest
issues for investigation in the EIS.
1. Project Title Lake Orono Improvement Project
2. Proposer
Contact Person
Address
Phone
City of Elk River 3.
Stephen Rohlf
13065 Orono Parkway
P.O. Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330
(612) 441-4904
RGU
City of Elk River
Stephen Kohlf
13065 Orono Parkway
P.O. Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330
(612) 441-4904
4. Reason for EAW
mEIS scoping _x_mandatory EAW __citizen petition __RGU discretion __Proposer volunteered
If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category Number(s) - 4410.4300 Subpart 27 (A)
5. Project Location
Sediment removal from lake
Those parts of Lake Orono where sediment is proposed to be removed are located in
portions oft he following areas:
· SE ¼ of SE ¼, Sec. 29;
· NE ¼ of NE XA, Sec. 31;
· NW ¼, Sec.32;
· SE ¼ of NE ¼, Sec. 32;
all in Township 33, Range 26, Sherbume Co., MN.
Sediment disposal
The sediment disposal sites are located in the following areas:
· SE IA of SE ¼, Sec. 29;
· S ½ofNE ¼, Sec. 31;
· SW ¼ of NW ¼, Sec. 32;
· NE ¼of SE ¼, Sec 32;
All in Township 33, Range 26, Sherbume Co., MN.
Attach copies of the following to the EAW:
a. a county map showing the general location of the project
b. copy(ies) of USGS 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map (photocopy is OK) indicating the project
boundaries;
C. a site plan showing all significant project and natural features.
A county vicinity map, United States Geological Survey (USGS) map, and site plans for
the sediment removal and disposal are attached.
6. Description Give a complete description of the proposed project and ancillary facilities (attach
additional sheets as necessary). Emphasize construction and operation methods and features that will cause
physical manipulation of the environment or produce wastes. Indicate the timing and duration of
construction activities.
Background
Lake Orono is an impoundment of the Elk River total encompassed within the City limits
of the City of Elk River. The Elk River empties into the Mississippi River approximately
one mile down stream of the dam for Lake Orono.
The local lake owner's association, the "Lake Orono Improvement Association" is
concerned about water quality in Lake Orono and areas of the lake that have recently
become non-navigable due to sediment. This group convinced the Elk River City
Council to conduct a study of these issues. The City of Elk River hired Wenck and
Associates to conduct a detailed study on both issues. Sherburne County, the City of Elk
River, the Sherbume County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD), the Lake
Orono Improvement Association, the Elk River Lions Club and the Elk River American
Legion all helped to fund the study.
The City of Elk River took great efforts to involve the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources (DNR), the Minnesota pollution Control Agency (MPCA), United States
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and the Sherbume County SWCD in the study
process to ensure all appropriate issued were addressed. The "Lake Orono Sedimentation
and Water Quality Study" was published in October of 1997.
Study recommendations
The study made the following four recommendations to improve Lake Orono:
Develop a lake management plan, with rough cost estimates for dredging parts of the
lake based on usage. The Lake Orono Improvement Association and the City of Elk
River work jointly to develop a plan to remove sediment from the lake and restore the
western most lobe to its original navigable depth. The sediment removal project that
follows the plan is the reason for this EAW. Management of erosion upstream to
slow future sedimentation is also included in the plan.
2. Dredge an in-lake sedimentation basin where the Elk River enters Lake Orono to
provide a reservoir for coarser fraction of the river's sediment load to be deposited in.
It was considered impractical to gain enough width or depth in the Elk River to
provide a sedimentation basin prior to Lake Orono. In addition, the city is concern
that creating a sedimentation basin in the river will disturb the equilibrium of the
sediment upstream. It was decided that by excavating sediment from the western lobe
of the lake that storage for future sedimentation would be provided in an area where
sediment deposition occurs naturally.
3. Develop a local water quality plan to address:
fecal coliform contamination in Lake Orono - The majority of the shoreline of the
lake is served with city sewer. Capacity at the city's waste water treatment plant has
been reserved and sewer trunk lines appropriately sized to serve the remainder of the
lake's shoreline. Further, the city has began a program of weekly fecal coliform
sampling during the swimming season to track this issue and eliminate potential
sources.
ongoing water quality monitoring - Routine secchi disk monitoring etc. will be
conducted by volunteers from the Lake Orono Improvement Association. Periodic
monitoring of a more detailed nature will be conducted by the city and compared to
the base line established by the 1997 study to determine if additional actions are
needed.
best management practices within the City of Elk River - The city will continue to
require best management practices and sedimentation prior to storm water discharging
to the lake. In addition, the use of vegetative buffer strips will be encouraged and a
citizen education program on issues like non-phosphorus fertilizer will be conducted.
4. Work with the watershed board and the comprehensive water plan committee to
develop a water quality action plan to address:
best management practices within the Elk River watershed - The sedimentation rate of
the Elk River is very low when compared to other rivers monitored by the USGS in
Minnesota. Much of the river is lined with natural buffers. However, the
sedimentation rate could be reduced the natural buffers should be maintained.
water quality goals for the Elk River watershed - A member of the Lake Orono
Improvement Association has recently been appointed to the Sherbume County Water
Plan Committee and will be acting as a liaison for the city.
Sediment removal
The removal of sediment from the lake described in study recommendation #2 is the issue
that mandates the EAW process. The lake study found that them was no net deposition of
suspended sediment in Lake Orono and the sedimentation that does exist consists of
primarily the coarser bedload fraction of the Elk River's sediment load.
The city is proposing to remove 1 to 2 feet of sediment from the western most lobe of the
lake (Area I, approximately 90,000 cu. yd.) to restore its original navigable depth. This
lobe will again act as the sedimentation basin for bedload from the river in the future.
In addition, the city plans to remove sediment that poses a safety hazard to boating from
two other areas of the lake (Areas II, 3,500 cu. yd. & Area IV, 13,500 cu. yd.).
Approximately 2,000 cu. yd. is proposed to be removed from Area III to improve access
and clean out an existing area where sediment currently deposits.
An optional area the city is considering involves the removal one foot of sediment from
the top of four high spots that pose hazards to boating. The material removed from the
high spots mentioned is proposed to be left on adjacent areas of the lake bed, away from
the channel of the river through the lake. The location of this material precludes its
removal without bridging the river channel through the lake or repeatedly cross it. It is
our opinion that both of these options would have a negative effect on water quality. This
work involves the moving of approximately 6,000 C.Y. of material.
A total of approximately 115,000 C.Y. of material are proposed to be removed and/or
graded by the project. The total project area encompass 61.9 acres. For details on the
locations, quantities, and depths see the attached sheet 1 of 2 of the attached Lake Orono
Improvement Proiect Site Plan.
Life expectancy of the proiect
Besides the inlet and outlet sediment sampling done as part of the 1997 lake study,
fourteen years of USGS data was available to determine the suspended sediment yield in
the Elk River. Based on the above described monitoring, the estimated average bedload
delivery rate to Lake Orono is 3,000 C.Y. per year. This is not a high rate of
sedimentation compared with other rivers. However, combined with increased erosion
control efforts upstream, the removal of 90,000 to 100,000 C.Y. of material from the
western lobe of the lake should allow the project to last for 30 to 40 years.
Implementation of erosion control measures adjacent to the areas of the lake proposed to
be excavated for safety reasons should allow these portions of the project to last
indefinitely.
The proposed project is not expected to affect the sedimentation rate of the Elk River.
The western most lobe of the lake is where sediment from the river is naturally collecting
now. The shallow nature of the excavation adjacent to the Elk River (1 to 2 feet
gradually tapering up to the existing river bottom) should not upset the equilibrium of
sediment upstream. In addition, areas with stabilizing vegetation will not be disturbed.
The only vegetation proposed to be remove by the project are 2 or 3 small pockets of
scrub willows (less than ½ inch diameter) that have colonized on deposition areas in the
immediate mouth of the Elk River within the last four years.
Construction methods
The city is proposing to draw down the lake by gradually, over a four day period, from its
normal level of approximately 872 MSL. The lake will be drawn down for
approximately two week prior to excavation activities commencing to allow the sediment
time to dry. The material will then be bulldozed into windrows, loaded into large tired
off-road trucks and hauled to upland sites in the immediate vicinity of the lake for
disposal. Water from the Elk River that passes through the lake during construction will
be directed away from the work areas to avoid potential negative impacts. If areas need
to be built-up to allow truck traffic, the lake sediment itself will be used.
The lake was drawn down twice in 1997. No negative impacts due to erosion or to
fisheries or wildlife were observed during these draw downs. Additionally, during these
draw downs it was observed that absolutely no vegetation exists on the lake bottom in
any of the areas where work is proposed.
The city will require that the contractor doing the work has a spill prevention and counter
control plan approved to ensure immediate clean-up of potential contaminates. Specific
erosion control measures are identified on the construction plans and additional measures
will be implemented if needed. Even when allowed to dry, the material proposed to be
removed from the lake will have a high enough moisture content that dust will not be a
problem. But, river water will be used to control dust, if needed.
Disposal sites
It is proposed that material removed from the lake be disposed of on upland sites in the
immediate vicinity. This avoids having to reload the material into on-road trucks. The
top soil will be removed from the disposal sites, the material will be spread and
compacted by a bulldozer, the topsoil will be replaced and the sites will then be
immediately seeded and mulched. So the sediment placed on the disposal sites does not
impede future development, except for berms proposed as sound barrier from adjacent US
Trunk Highway #10, the typical depth of the material deposited will only be
approximately 3 feet. The city will contract the services of a geotechnical engineer
during construction to verify and document the conditions of the disposal sites. Sheet 2
of 2 of the attached Lake Orono Improvement Proiect Site Plans shows the locations of
the disposal sites, quantities, and details on erosion control measures.
Core samples of the sediment in the lake were taken and analyzed. The city worked with
MPCA to identify the sampling locations and what parameters were tested for. The
sediment was determined to be clean and MPCA has indicated they have no concerns
with the quality of this material.
Duration of construction
The proposal is to draw the lake down in early August of 1998 and begin sediment
removal in mid-August. The construction will be completed on or before October 31,
1998. At predicted flow rates, it is estimated that the lake can be brought back to its
normal water levels within four days, prior to freeze-up.
The above iime frame was selected to minimize impacts on fisheries, wildlife (especially
waterfowl) and the summer recreational use of the lake. Further, the time period selected
should be one of the driest of the year.
Beneficiaries of the project
The City of Elk River feels that the project described is imperative. Not only will the
immediate lake owners benefit, but Lake Orono is a regional recreation facility enjoyed
by thousands of non-lake owners each year. Further, because it draws people to Elk
River, the lake is an economic resource for the community and Sherburne County.
Alternatives
Without a project the lake will continue to decline and pose additional safety hazard to
boating. Due to the very low sedimentation yield in the Elk River, additional best
management practices within the watershed will facilitate maintenance of the sediment
yield, but can not be expected to significantly reduce it. No feasible alternative for
keeping a reasonable water depth in the lake besides sediment removal has been
discovered. For example, raising the height of the dam to gain additional depth will flood
numerous homes.
Other methods for removing sediment from the lake were explored; such as hydraulic
dredging or bulldozing material from the lake in the winter when frozen. These methods
were more costly and/or would create greater negative impacts. The project and methods
proposed are the best option for restoring this resource.
Public Input
City staff has facilitated an average of more than one meeting per month since May of
1995 on the status of Lake Orono. These meeting have all been open to the public. A
representative of the Sherbume County Soil and Water Conservation District has been
routinely in attendance at these meetings and on several occasions staff from MPCA,
DNR, Board of Soil and Water Resources (BSWR), and USACE have attended. The
local paper, the Elk River Star News, has publish numerous articles regarding the
proposed lake project and the monthly meetings.
The Elk River City Council held a public meeting regarding the proposed project on
12/15/97 and a public meeting specifically for the lake owners was held on 1/15/98. The
response from the approximately 100 people in attendance at the lake owners meeting
was very positive. This meeting will be aired on public access television.
The Lake Orono Improvement Association is also making personal contact with all lake
owners who were not at the 1/15/98 meeting so they may attend an additional public
hearing for the project, required through the city's conditional use process. The public
hearing for the conditional use permit requires mailed notice as well as notice in the local
paper. In addition there will be an assessment heating for the project.
The results of the lake study were presented to the Sherburne County Board and the Elk
River Watershed Board at public meetings. The recommended lake improvement will
also be presented to these boards at public meetings.
Funding
The estimated cost of the lake improvement project described in this EAW is $750,000.
It is proposed to be funded through special assessments against lakeshore owners and tax
revenue.
7. Project Magnitude
Total Project Area (acres) 61.9~
or Length (miles) __N/A~
Number of Residential Units
Unattached N/A
Attached N/A
Commercial / Industrial / Institutional Building Area (gross floor space)
Total N/A square feet;
Indicate area of specific uses:
Office N/A
Retail N/A
Warehouse N/A
Light Industrial N/A
Other Commercial (specify)
Building Height(s)
N/A
N/A
Manufacturing. N/A
Other Industrial N/A
Institutional N/A
Agricultural N/A
0
and funding required:
Unit of Government Type of Application Stares
DNR Protected Waters Permit Pending
USACE Individual Permit (404) Pending
MPCA Water Quality Certification (401) Pending
MPCA State Disposal System Permit Pending
MPCA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Pending
City of Elk River Conditional Use Permit Pending
Permits and Approvals Required List all known local, state, and federal permits, approvals,
9. Land Use Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent
lands. Discuss the compatibility of the project with adjacent and nearby land uses; indicate whether any
potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazards due to past
land uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks.
Lake Orono is an impoundment of the Elk River, but it has been in its present
configuration for nearly all of the last century. The vast majority of the land use
surrounding the lake is residential. The improvement to the lake will be beneficial to
these properties. Testing of lake sediment supports the fact that environmental hazards
due to contaminates is not an issue.
The proposed sediment disposal sites are currently undeveloped with no evidence of past
environmental hazards. Sediment disposal is proposed at a shallow enough depth
(average of 3 ft.) that it will not hinder the sites future development. Topsoil from the
disposal sites will be stripped and replaced and seeded after the sediment is put into place.
10. Cover Type Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and
after development (before and after totals should be equal):
Before After Before After
Types 2 to 8 wetlands _N/A N/A_ Urban / Suburban Lawn .3 .3
Wooded / Forest 3.9 0__ Landscaping
Brush/Grassland _15.6 19.5_ Impervious Surface N/A N/A
Cropland _10.1_ _10.1_ Other (describe) LAKE 61.9 61.9
The crop land is an alfalfa field.
11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources
ft. Describe fish and wildlife resources on or near the site and discuss how they would be affected by the
project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts.
The draw down of the lake for the project will be gradual to minimize impacts on aquatic
wildlife. A similar draw down was done in 1997 without adverse impacts, as observed by
the DNR. The project is also proposed to be done in the fall of the year eliminating
concerns regarding nesting waterfowl. The project avoids vegetated areas. The lake is an
impoundment of the Elk River, which will continue its normal flow through the lake
during the project. Fish and wildlife will be temporarily displaced to the river, but
normal lake water levels will be restored prior to freeze-up.
b. Are there any state listed endangered, threatened, or special-concern species; rare plant communities;
colonial waterbird nesting colonies; native prairie or other rare habitat; or other sensitive ecological
resources on or near the site? x Yes No
If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate ifa site survey of the
resources was conducted. Describe measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts.
A search of the DNR Natural Heritage database was conducted and the following
sensitive ecological resources were identified near the site:
Rare Community - Oak Forest (Central) Dry Subtype - This community was found in
Section 20, Township 33, Range 26, Sherburne County, MN. It is located within one
mile of the project, but not within the project boundaries and it will not be affected.
Plant Species of Special Concern - Juniperus Horizontalis - This species was not
identified within the project boundaries and will not be affected.
Threatened Species - Blanding's Turtles - There have beer~ four sightings of Blanding's
within one mile of Lake Orono. The lake bottom lacks vegetation and the project area
does not contain the protected bays where these turtles like to over winter. However, the
city will strive to finish the project as soon as possible and bring the lake level back to
normal as close to October l~t as possible (when the turtle start looking for winter
habitat).
Physical Impacts on Water Resources Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic
alteration (dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, impoundment) of any surface water
(lake, pond, wetland, stream, drainage ditch)? x Yes __ No
If yes, identify the water resource to be affected and describe: the alteration, including the construction
process; volumes of dredged or fill material; area affected; length of stream diversion; water surface area
affected; timing and extent of fluctuations in the water surface elevations; spoils disposal sites; and
proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts.
Lake Orono is proposed to be dredged to restore its historic navigable depth. The lake
will be restored to its pre-project boundaries and no wetlands are proposed to be
impacted. For further details see #6 - "Description"
13. Water Use
a. Will the project involve the installation or abandonment of any wells? Yes x No
For abandoned wells give the location and Unique well number. For new wells, o--~'other ~e~iously
unpermitted wells, give the location and purpose of the well and Unique well number (if known).
The project will not involve the abandonment of any wells.
b. Will the project require an appropriation of ground or surface water (Including dewatering)?
_x_ Yes __ No
If yes, indicate the source, quantity, duration, purpose of the appropriation, and DNR water appropriation
permit number of any existing appropriations. Discuss the impact of the appropriation on ground water
levels.
Lake Orono, an impoundment of the Elk River, will be dewatered from 8/1/98 to
10/31/98 to allow for the removal of sediment. The lake is approximately 1,270 ac. ft.,
but the Elk River will continue to flow through it during the project. The entire project,
including the dewatering, will be covered under a single DNR Protected Waters Permit.
The USACE and MPCA will also consider the dewatering in their permits.
The effects on ground water from the dewatering will be temporary and in the immediate
vicinity of the lake shore. When the lake is brought back to its normal water level ground
water levels will also be restored.
c. Will the project require connection to a public water supply? __ Yes _x_ No
If yes, identify the supply, the DNR water appropriation permit number of the supply, and the quantity to
be used.
14. Water-related Land Use Management Districts Does any part of the project site involve a
shoreland zoning district, a delineated 100-year flood plain, or a federally designated wild or scenic river
land use district? _x_ Yes __ No
If yes, identify the district and discuss the compatibility of the project with the land use restrictions of the
district.
All of the land adjacent to the lake is in the Shoreland Overlay District, because Lake
Orono is a DNR Protected Water. The City of Elk River has adopted the DNR approved
Shoreland Ordinance. No shoreland impact zones will be affect by the project and all
other aspects of the project are compatible with the Shoreland District's restrictions.
Portions of the disposal sites include land designated as floodfringe. No fill will be
placed in the floodway. The project will comply with all floodplain restrictions.
A conditional use permit with DNR review is required by both the City of Elk River's
Shoreland and Floodplain Ordinances. An MPCA State Disposal System permit is also
required. No land in a Wild and Scenic River District is involved with this project. _
15. Water Surface Use Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body?
Yes x No
If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or
conflicts with other users or fish and wildlife resources.
It is not anticipated that as a result of the project the number of watercraft on Lake Orono
will increase. However the project will increase the useable area of the lake dispersing
the existing use.
16. Soils Approximate depth (in feet) to:
Ground water: minimum~ average__ Bedrock: minimum__ average__
Describe the soils on the site, giving SCS classifications, if known. (SCS interpretations and soil boring
logs need no.._3t be attached.)
Disposal sites
Ground water: The minimum and average depth to ground water at the disposal site is
greater than 6 feet.
Bedrock: minimum 60 feet average 70 feet.
Soil classifications: The majority of the soil at these sites have SCS Soil classifications
of Hubbard loamy sand and Sandberg loamy coarse sand.
Lake
Ground water: The depth to ground water currently is 0 because it is a lake. When the
lake is drawn down the depth of ground water will be the elevation of the river or
probably lower. No signs of ground water seepage into the lake were observed during
past draw downs.
Bedrock: minimum 50 feet average 60 feet
Soil classifications: No SCS classification exist for lake bottom, but the predominate
engineering soil classifications are clayey sand with organic clay (SC - SM/SM) and sand
with silt (SP-SM).
17. Erosion and Sedimentation Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of
soil to be moved: acres __61.9 ; cubic yards _115,000_
Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map.
Describe the erosion and sedimentation measures to be used during and after construction of the project.
No steep slopes are associated with the project on the lake or disposal sites before or after
the construction. The lake bottom in the locations of the proposed work is made up of
mainly sand and is unlikely to be agitated into suspension. No flushing of sediment was
observed during past draw downs of the lake. Best management practices will be adhered
to, the details of which are incorporated into the construction plans.
18. Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff
a. Compare the quantity and quality of the site runoff befire and after the project. Describe methods to
be used to manage and/or treat runoff.
Water quantity and quality will not change due to the project. Water from the Elk River
will be directed away from work areas during construction to safeguard its quality, but it
will continue to pass through the lake.
b. Identify the route(s) and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site. Estimate the impacts of the
runoff an the quality of the receiving waters. (if the runoff may affect a lake consult "EAW Guidelines"
about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed.)
Lake Orono drains via the Elk River to the Mississippi River, which is approximately one
mile away. A negligible increase in water quality may result from the project due to an
increase in the lake's volume.
19. Water Quality - Wastewaters
a. Describe sources, quantities, and composition (except for normal domestic sewage) of all sanitary and
industrial wastewaters produced or treated at the site.
N/A
b. Describe any waste treatment methods to be used and give estimates of the composition after
treatment, or if the project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of the site conditions for
such systems. Identify receiving waters (including ground water) and estimate the impact of the discharge
on the quality of the receiving waters. (if the discharge may affect a lake consult "EAW Guidelines" about
whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed.)
N/A
e. If wastes will be discharged into a sewer system or pretreatment system, identify the system and
discuss the ability of the system to accept the volume and composition of the wastes. Identify any
improvements which will be necessary.
N/A
20. Ground Water - Potential for Contamination
a. Approximate depth (in feet) to ground water:__
minimum; __ average.
The minimum and average depth to groundwater at the disposal sites is greater than 6
feet. The depth to ground water for the lake is hard to ascertain because it is an
impoundment of surface waters. No ground water seepage back into the lake has been
observed during past draw downs so it can be assumed that the natural depth to ground
water is the elevation of the Elk River or lower.
b. Describe any of the following site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site map:
sinkholes; shallow limestone formations/karst conditions; soils with high infiltration rates; abandoned or
unused wells. Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to any of these
hazards.
None of the hazards described are of concern with this project.
c. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present on the project site and identify
measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating ground water.
Core samples, taken as directed by MPCA, indicated no hazardous substances present in
the lake sediment. Typical fuels associated with construction equipment will be used.
The contractor who is hired will be required to submit a spill prevention and counter
control plan for approval.
21. Solid Wastes; Hazardous Wastes; Storage Tanks
a. Describe the types, amounts, and composition of solid or hazardous wastes to be generated, including
animal manures, sludges and ashes. Identify the method and location of disposal. For projects generating
municipal solid waste indicate if there will be a source separation plan; list type(s) and how the project will
be modified to allow recycling.
N/A
b. Indicate the number, location, size, and use of any above or below ground tanks to be used for storage
of petroleum products or other materials (except water).
The project does not involve the storage of any products.
22. Traffic
Parking spaces added _N/Am Existing spaces (if project involves expansion)_N/Am Estimated total
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) generated __N/A_ Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if
known) and its timing N/A
Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on the affected roads and describe any traffic
improvements which will be necessary.
N/A
23. Vehicle-Related Air Emissions Provide an estimate of the effect of the project's traffic
generated on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or
other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. (if the project involves 500 or more parking spaces,
consult "EAW Guidelines" about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed.)
N/A
24. Stationary Source Air Emissions Will the project involve any stationary sources of air
emissions (such as boiler or exhaust stacks)? __ Yes x No
If yes, describe the source, quantities, and composition of the emissions; the proposed air pollution control
devices; the quantities and composition of the emissions after treatment; and the effects on air quality.
N/A
25. Will the project generate dust, odor, or noise during construction and/or operation? _x_Yes No
If yes, describe the sources, characteristics, duration, and quantities or intensity, and any proposed
measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify the locations of sensitive receptors in the vicinity and
estimate the impacts on these receptors.
Noise: Typical construction noise is expected, but no sensitive receptors are in the
immediate project area. The city will enforce its normal hours for construction of 7:00
a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday.
Dust: Even with the lake dewatered there should be enough moisture content left in the
sediment that dust will not be a problem. The city will include a clause in the
specifications for the project that watering as needed is required to hold dust down.
Water for this is readily available at the project site from the Elk River.
26. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site:
a. archeological, historical, or architectural resources? Yes x No
b. prime or unique farmland? ~Yes x No
c. designated parks, recreation areas, or trails? x Yes No
d. scenic views and vistas? x Yes No
e. other unique resources ~Yes x No
If any items are answered Yes, describe the resource and identify any impacts on the resources due to the
project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts.
A query of the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office revealed no archeological,
historical, or architectural resources that will be affected by the project.
City owned Orono Beach Park is on Lake Orono, but it is not on a lobe of the lake where
construction activities are proposed. The timing of the project, late in the swimming
season, should help minimize the impact.
The lake itself could be considered a scenic view. However, the project is to benefit the
lake and will not ultimately effect the aesthetics.
27. Will the project create adverse visual impacts? (Examples include: glare from intense lights; lights
visible in wilderness areas; and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks.
Yes x No
If yes, explain.
28. Compatibility with Plans Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive land use
plan or any other applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of a local, regional, state, or
federal agency? x Yes __ No
If yes, identify the applicable plan(s), discuss the compatibility of the project with the provisions of the
plan(s), and explain how any conflicts between the project and the plan(s) will be resolved. If no, explain.
The City of Elk River's comprehensive plan, which includes a master park plan,
recognizes the lake as a resource for the community both economically and
recreationally. A project that improves the lake is compatible with these plans.
Lake Orono is also subject to Sherbume County's "Comprehensive Water Plan". A
representative from the Sherburne County Soil and Water Conservation District has been
involved with the project from the beginning and actually assisted in the Lake study that
preceded the project. The project is consistent with the county's comprehensive water
plan.
29. Impacts on Infrastructure and Public Services Will new or expanded utilities, roads,
other infrastructure, or public services be required to serve the project? ~ Yes x No
If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure / services needed. (Any infrastructure that is a"
connected action" with respect to the project must be assessed in this EAW; see "EAW Guideline" for
details.)
N/A
30. Related Developments; Cumulative Impacts
a. Are future stages of this development planned or likely? __Yes x No
If yes, briefly describe future stages, their timing, and plans for environmental review.
b. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? __ Yes x No
If yes, briefly describe the past development, its timing, and past environmental review.
C. Is other development anticipated on adjacent lands or outlots? x Yes ~ No
If yes, briefly describe the development and its relationship to the present project.
d. If a, b, or c were marked Yes, discuss any cumulative environmental impacts resulting from this
project and the other development.
The proposed lake improvement project is not a "phased action" or "connected action"
with any other project or development. However, with or without the lake project,
development of the few remaining vacant parcels adjacent to the lake is anticipated in the
near future.
The shallow depth of sediment (3 foot average except for berms erected as sound
barriers) should not hinder development on the disposal sites. The sediment to be
disposed of has been analyzed for organic matter. Soils high in organic material will not
be used in locations where footings are likely. The core samples taken indicate that
hazardous substances in the sediment from the lake is not a concern.
31. Other Potential Environmental Impacts If the project may cause any adverse
environmental impacts which were not addressed by items 1 to 28, identify and discuss them here, along
with any proposed mitigation.
None
32. Summary of issues (This section need not be completed if the EAW is being done for ElS
scoping; instead, address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decisions document which must accompany
the EAW.) List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the
project is commenced. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be
considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as permit
conditions.
The city is proposing to direct the flow of the Elk River through Lake Orono away from
the construction activities. The specific of how this is accomplished will be reviewed and
approved by the DNR through their Protected Waters Permit.
With the proposed draw down of the lake, it is anticipated that individuals will request
permits for projects that fall below the Ordinary High Water mark. The DNR has
requested the city's assistance in compiling and coordinating these individual projects.
A study of the wetland inventory map and aerial photos, site visits, and discussions with
the property owners, do not reveal any wetlands on the sediment disposal sites. This will
be field verified as soon as conditions permit in the spring. Under no circumstance will
sediment be placed in a wetland.
CERTIFICATION BY THE RGU (all 3 certifications must be signed for EQB
acceptance of the EAW for publication of notice in the EQB Monitor_)
a. I hereby certify that the information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of
my knowledge~~ /
b. I hereby certify that the project described in this EAW is the complete project and there are no other
projects, project stages, or project components, other than those described in this document, which are
related to the project as "connected actions" or "phased actions," as defined, respectively, at Minn.
Rules, pts.~bp.
c. I hereby certify that copies of the completed EAW are being sent to all points on the official EQB
Si na r.W_
Title of signer ~'
e ' Date
ELK RIVER
T 33 N.-R. 26W ~
225 47
¢
¢
¢
¢
¢
¢
¢
¢
¢
LAKE ORONO IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
'"19
"17
'""!i.._'
T 33N.~.~,').F."
T 32 N
T 12! N.
17'30'
Lt . -'
l
872
I 32
Park
,,
i
I
II
II
SCAL£ 1:24000
I
o
ti'/
N
IOO~ o
.~ -DREDCE AREAS
1030 2000 3000 ~00 5000
.5 0
CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET
N,"'IO~AI -:ODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929
~ - DISPOSAL SITES
CITY OF ELK RIVER
6000 7000
t XlU3M ETE, R
Site Location Map
Wenck OCT 1997
WenckAssociates, lnc. 1800 PioneerCreek Ctr. Figure
Environmental Engineers Maple Plain, MN 55359
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul. Minnesota 55155-40_Lc
March 20, 1998
Stephen Rohlf
City of Elk River
13065 Orono Parkway
P.O. Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330
Lake Orono Improvement Project
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
Sherburne County
Dear Mr. Rohlf:
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the EAW for the
Lake Orono Improvement Project. We offer the following comments tbr your
consideration.
DNR staff have been consulted throughout the development of this project. The city is
also complying with the applicable floodplain and shoreland ordinances.
From our experience we have found that dredge projects tend to have a limited life.
There may be an increased rate of bedload deposition in the near term after dredging.
This is likely due to the increased capacity of the reservoir to accept sediment. It is also
important that the City of Elk River continue to support and work with efforts in the
watershed to improve water quality and reduce sedimentation upstream.
We recommend that work done during the drawdown period should be completed as
quickly as possible to minimize the chances of summer fish kill.
We also recommend that during the time the reservoir is being refilled that a portion of
the flow be allowed to escape so that the tailwaters are not de-watered.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. The project does not require
preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in our opinion. We look
forward to receiving your record of decision and response to comments. Minnesota
Rules part 4410.1700, subparts 4 & 5, require you to send us your Record of Decision
within five days of deciding this action. Please contact Gail Fox of my staff at (612)
296-0731 if you have questions regarding this letter.
DNR Information: 612-296-6157, 1-800-766-6000 · TTY: 612-296-5484, 1-80I)-657-3929
An Equal Opportunity Ihnph~ycr ~.~ Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a
Who Values Diversily '~ll{ll~ Minimum ill I0% Posl-('onsurner Waste
Lake Orono Improvement Project
March 20, 1998
Page 2
Sincerely,
Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor
Environmental Review and Assistance Unit
Office of Management and Budget Services
c: Bob Hance
Con Christianson
Bret Anderson
Del Barber
Lynn Lewis, USFWS
Gregg Downing, EQB
#980260-01
FOX:ER12 :L OROEAW. doc
.ty of
'ver
April 8, 1998
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Thomas Balcom, Supervisor
Environmental Review and Assistance Unit
Office of Management and Budget Services
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155-4010
Subject: Response to comments received on
Lake Orono Improvement Project EAW
Dear Mr. Balcom,
The City of Elk River appreciates your comments on the Lake Orono Improvement
Project EAW, dated March 20, 1998, and working with the DNR throughout the design
of this project. The city looks forward to a continued spirit of city/DNR cooperation
during the construction phase of the project.
In direct response to your comments on the EAW, the city will draw the lake down as
quickly as possible to minimize the chance of summer fish kill. The city will also allow
flow to escape to the tail waters of the Elk River while Lake Orono is being refilled after
the project is completed. Lastly, the city plans to continue to support work on improving
the Elk River Watershed and in the immediate lake drainage to reduce erosion. The Lake
Orono Improvement Association has already discussed the issue of ongoing city
participation with lake issues task force.
If there are any further questions, please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY
March 30, 1998
Mr. Timothy Fell
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
190 5th Street East
St. Paul, MN 55101-1638
Re:
96-02003-TJF; Lake Orono Improvement Project
T33 R26 S29, S31 & S32, Sherburne County
SHPO Number: 97-1491
Dear Mr. Fell:
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above project. It has been
reviewed pursuant to the responsibilities given the State Historic Preservation Officer by
the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Procedures of the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation (36CFR800).
We have recently written the City of Elk River with some concerns regarding potential
archaeological properties in this project area. A copy of our letter is attached. Some
portions of the project area need to be surveyed.
If you have any questions regarding our review of this project, please contact our Review
and Compliance Section at 612-296-5462.
Sincerely,
Dennis A. Gimmestad
Government Programs & Compliance Officer
cc: Stephen Rohlf, City of Elk River
;;1] ]xl l.ll)l,~; ltt)l iii\ \l.ll) \\l']~l'/;n\!x,l' t'\l I. '~ltX,\l:h l lX.]]l~)2-1'm~,." l'll I l'lll)\l]:t,12-£'m-:,l'-'~,
March 6, 1998
City of Elk River
Attn: Stephen Rohlf
13065 Orono Parkway
P.O. Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330
Re:
EAW; Lake Orono Improvement Project
Sherburne County
SHPO Number: 98-1491
Dear Mr. Rohlf:
Thank you for providing this office with a copy of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for
the above-referenced project. It has been reviewed pursuant to responsibilities given to the
Minnesota Historical Society by the Minnesota Historic Sites Act and the Minnesota Field
Archaeology Act and through the process outlined in Minnesota Rules 4410.1600.
The response to question 26a indicates that no cultural resources will be affected. Some
clarification on this point is needed.
No previously identified archaeological sites are located in the area proposed for dredging.
However, we believe that two of the areas proposed for placement of the dredge spoil (the areas
identified in the SE quarter of Section 29 and the SE quarter of Section 32 as indicated on
Figure 1 of the EAW) do have significant potential for archaeological sites. Therefore, we
recommend that an archaeological survey of these areas be completed. The survey must meet
the requirements of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Identification and Evaluation,
and should include an evaluation of National Register eligibility for any properties which are
identified. For your information, we have enclosed a list of consultants who have expressed an
interest in undertaking such surveys.
if tne areas can be documented as previously disturbed or previously surveyed, we will re-
evaluate the need for survey. Previously disturbed areas are those where the naturally
occurring post-glacial soils and sediments have been recently removed. Any previous survey
work must meet contemporary standards.
If you have any questions on our review of this project, please contact me at 612-296-5462.
Sincerely,
Dennis A. Gimmestad
Government Programs and Compliance Officer
Enclosure: List of Consultants
~ty of
April3,1998
St. Paul District Corps of Engineers
ATTN: Tim Fell
Army Corps of Engineers/Cencs-CO-R
190 Fifth St. East
St. Paul, MN 55155-4100
Dear Mr. Fell,
I am writing to you concerning the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office's
comments regarding the Lake Orono Improvement Project, SHPO number 98-1491. The
State Historic Preservation Office indicated in a ietter, dated March 6, 1998, that two of
the proposed sludge spoil disposal sites for the Lake Orono project have significant
potential for archaeological sites.
One is the Orono Cemetery site in the Southeast Quarter of Section 32. This site is high
ground that was directly adjacent to the original channel for the Elk River, prior to the
creation of Lake Orono. Further, this site has never been disturbed.
The City of Elk River is not contesting the judgment of State Historic Preservation Office
regarding this site. The city has requested bids from three firms to do a Phase I
Archaeological Survey of this site and hopes to have it completed in early May of this
year.
The second area deemed to have significant potential as a archaeological site is a minor
disposal area in the Southeast Quarter of Section 29, referred to as the Island View site.
The City of Elk river is contesting this site for the following reasons:
This disposal area is over 600 feet at the closest from where the historic river channel
was located. I have included a copy of an 1888 plat map and a Lake Orono
Improvement Project site plan for verification. The sediment deposits still found in
the lake and identified on the attached site plan provide further proof of the locations
of inside curves of the original river channel.
The Island view disposal site is on relatively Iow ground as can be verified by the
contours on the attached Dredging Deposit Exhibit for the Island View site and the
attached photos. The peaty nature of the ground underlying the proposed disposal site
makes it unlikely that the area would have been utilized as a camp or burial site.
13065 Orono Parkway ° P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
Lastly, this disposal area has been disturbed at least twice in the past. The first
disturbance was in the 1960s. Material was dredged from the lake in the same
location that is proposed to be dredged for the Lake Orono Improvement Project.
This dredged material was placed adjacent to the shoreline. This work disturbed the
southern portion (stockpile) of the proposed disposal area for sure.
I do not have records of who did the dredging or exactly what year it happened. I
believe the developer of the adjacent subdivision did it to build up the shoreline to
make the lots more desirable. I am 100 percent sure this did happen because having
grown up in this location I played on the spoil deposits.
The second disturbance was during house construction on the northern most area
proposed for disposal. Both of the houses in this location are full basement walkouts
with major associated yard work.
To summarize, The City of Elk River sees the potential of the Orono Cemetery disposal
area to be an archaeological site. We will be doing a Phase I Archaeological Survey in
this location. However, the Island View site is a long ways away from the original river
channel on previously disturbed low ground. The city does not truly believe this site has
a significant potential as an archaeological site. The city respectfully requests that an
archaeological survey not be required in this location.
Sincerely,
Stephen Rohlf, Buildin/g~Zoning Administrator
RESOLUTION 98-
RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY OF ELK RIVER
A resolution of the City Council of the City of Elk River regarding the
environmental review process for the proposed Lake Orono Improvement
Project; setting forth the City Council's findings of fact regarding the need for
an Environmental Impact Statement; and declaring that the preparation of
an Environmental Impact Statement is not necessary
WHEREAS, the City of Elk River proposes to excavate and/or grade
115,000 cubic yards of lake sediment and dispose of it on sites adjacent to
Lake Orono; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Rules, Part 4410.4300, Subpart 27
(A) (EQB Rules) the Project requires the preparation of a mandatory
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) under Minnesota
Environmental Policy Act (MEPA); and,
WHEREAS, the City, as the responsible governmental unit (RGU)
under EQB Rules, prepared an EAW as required by EQB Rules; and,
WHEREAS, notice of availability of the EAW was published in the
EQB Monitor on February 23, 1998; a press release was given to the Elk
River Star News on February 18, 1998; posted notice was given at the Elk
River Pubhc Library and Elk River City Hall on February 18, 1998; and
copies of the EAW were supplied to all persons and agencies on the EQB
official EAW distribution list; and,
WHEREAS, comments have been received on the EAW from the
Minnesota Historical Society, by letter dated March 30, 1998 that referred to
a previous letter dated March 6, 1998, both from Dennis Gimmestad; and the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, by letter dated March 20, 1998,
from Thomas Balcom; and,
WHEREAS, all substantive comments have been responded to
appropriately by the City as RGU in the staff memorandum to the City
Council, dated April 20, 1998, from Stephen Rohlf, Building and Zoning
Administrator; and,
WHEREAS, the environmental review process mandated by the
Minnesota Environmental Policy Act and implemented through the EQB
Rules has been followed and this resolution shall be the City's record of its
compliance with the EQB Rules and decision in this matter; and,
WHEREAS, the City, as RGU, shall order the preparation of an EIS if
the Project has the potential for significant environmental effects; and,
WHEREAS, in deciding whether a project has the potential for
significant environmental effects, the City is to apply the criteria set forth in
Section 4410,1700 subparts 6 & 7 of the EQB Rules.
NOW, THEREFORE, BASED ON THE INFORMATION GATHERED
DURING THE EAW PROCESS, THE COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE
EAW, THE RESPONSES THERETO FROM CITY STAFF IN THEIR
MEMORANDUM TO THE COUNCIL DATED APRIL 20, 1998, THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ELK RIVER FINES THE PROJECT DOES
NOT REQUIRE THE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT.
The foregoing resolution was introduced by Council Member
and duly seconded by Council Member The following
voted in favor of the resolution:
The following voted against the resolution: None
The following were absent: None
Whereupon the resolution is adopted.
Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Elk River this 20th day
of April, 1998.
Henry A. Duitsman, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sandra A. Thackery, City Clerk