01-17-2001 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minnehalia Creek Watershed Disfrict Improving Quality ofWatrr, Quality ofLifi MEMORANDUM Date: November 8,2000 To: Paul Weinberger, City of Orono From: Jim Hafher, Senior Technician RE: Technical Evaluation Panel Findings of Fact, Van Eeckhout Site A Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) consisting of David Thill (Hennepin Conservation District). Doug Snyder (Board of Water and Soil R^urces), and Jim Hafncr (Minneluha Creek Watershed District) visited the Vau Eeckhout site on October 16.2000. Others present v-cre Paul Weinberger (City of Orono) and Barbara Moeller (Minnehaha Creek Watershed District). The soil suive>' for this site indicates marsh soils, which are almost always found in a wetland. The wetland delineation performed by Svoboda Ecological Services (SES) found some areas to be outside the wetland boundary based on vegetation and a lack of hydrology. The TEP was asked by the City of Orono to confirm those areas. It was reported by SES and the landowner that the site had been drained by ditches for many years. The exact date of ditch construction was not known but estimated to be over fifty > ears ago. After a field investigation of the site the TEP requested that an aerial photo history be arranged to ex a mine physical changes in the site from ditching or other activities. Wayne Jacobson from SES acquired the necessary* photos. Following review of the aerial photos, dating from 1937 to 1997, the TEP concluded this was an altered site. Photos did not show stiyling water when adjacent wetlands did w'>h some adjacent wetlands getting progressively wetter in lime. This is an example of effective draining due to ditching. Deep pits dug to inspect soils and test for h>'drolog>* did not have water seeping into them. Upland vegetation was observed to be moving mto the reed canary grass. These factors all suggest the removal of hydrology and were a basis for the TEP decision. Based on this decision, the TEP generally agreed to the delineation line. One exception was an area behind the existing house where a small isolated wetland had been delineated separately from the main wetland. The TEP felt the wetland line could have been extended to the 938 contour Um which is the general elevation of the larger wetland basin that has been delineated as wetland and takes in the small bstin that does show hydrology m the part of the property east and south of the existing bouse. The LOU, Minnehaha Creek Watershed Distriei (MCWD), will require wetland buffers that would extend out