Orono Substation Replacement - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

' 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS There are no historic landmarks, historic properties, districts, or landscapes within the Project ' location that are listed on the NRHP, or determined or recommended for listing on the NRHP. Because the Project's Proposed Route is adjacent to existing transportation and utility corridors for the majority of the route, the potential affect to historic structures is considered to be minimal. One of the rejected Alternative Routes to the Proposed Route crosses a single archaeological site ' Based upon the findings of this Report and current plans for the proposed Project, URS recommends field survey at two locations for the Proposed Route. The first survey area is a portion of the 16 acre parcel where the expansion to the Orono Substation is proposed. The area is a small ' portion of the parcel that has not been surveyed and is adjacent to a structure viewed on historic aerial photographs. This survey area is recommended for previously undisturbed areas. The second survey area is a landform that previously identified site 21HE0162 occupies The second survey area will only be necessary if the landform previously identified is considered for placement of new transmission structures. ' URS believes that field survey at previously undisturbed areas within these two locations is warranted because the proposed Project is situated in an area that is considered to have high potential to contain archaeological sites, combined with the fact that there are several previously ' identified cultural resources in the cultural resource Study Area. The remainder of the Proposed Route would be constructed along existing transportation and utility corridors, tying in to an existing transmission line and associated structures. These areas are considered to be previously disturbed and no field survey is warranted. To summarize the literature review findings, no previously identified property listed or determined eligible for listing on the NRHP and the Minnesota Register of Historic Sites is located within the Project location. One previously identified archaeological site, 21HE0162, is located The site was evaluated in 1994 and received a not eligible determination. The potential for impacting unrecorded archaeological resources within the Project ' location is considered to be high due to number of previously recorded sites and the Project's proximity to the archaeologically sensitive Lake Minnetonka. To assure that any undiscovered cultural resources are recognized and protected during ground disturbance associated with the Project, URS further recommends that Xcel Energy have an unanticipated discovery plan in place. This plan would provide guidance to Xcel Energy Project Orono Project Phase Ia Literature Review April,2011 MPUC Docket No. E002/TL-11-223 19