My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Project Packet
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
B
>
Baldur Park Road
>
1340 Baldur Park Road - 08-117-23-31-0015
>
Land Use
>
82-669, PLAT
>
Project Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/7/2025 2:36:10 PM
Creation date
10/7/2025 2:30:13 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
184
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Ernst Associates <br />ME MO <br />12 July 1982 <br />,':Age 2 <br />Their major problem in their study relating to Lake Harriet was that ttiey <br />could not pond this material and allow it to perculate through the soil <br />system before it went into Lake Harriet. It would drain directly into <br />the open water system. <br />Dr. Sapperal then referred me to a gentleman by the name of Dr. Rouse <br />Farnham / 373-1447 or 376-8140 laboratory at the U of MN Soils Dept. / <br />373-1062. <br />Dr. Farnham felt that there are ways to improve the quality of water <br />by sedimentation systems and allowing the water to perculate down into <br />the soil. There have been studies done along Hwy. 55 by rugena Hickock's <br />office using calcite material to collect phosphorus particles. This has <br />been very successful and can be done at low cost. The park reserve <br />district has experimented with peat as a filtering system to improve <br />water quality. <br />Dr Farnham referred me to Eugene Hickock's office to get more data relat- <br />ing to these various studies. <br />Eugene Hickock's Office / contact person was Norm Wenck <br />I met with Mr. Wenck and showed him our scheme for the Baldur Park <br />peninsula. or your interest, Eugene Hickock's office are the people <br />who review all watershed permits relating to any development in the <br />Minnehaha Watershed District, Lake Minnetonka WatershL.i District. In <br />reviewing the plan, it was felt that there is no problem with the type <br />of development that we are proposing and means of improving the water <br />quality. This does not mean that they have approved the plan but from <br />their general review felt there are really no problems with the hard <br />cover and water quality for this particular site. <br />I have in my files a wetlands preservation guideline that was prepared <br />by this office in reference to Rice Creek Watershed District. This par- <br />ticula� document was prepared and is a very stringent document tnat outlines <br />the amount of uevelopment that can take place and the amount of nutrient <br />loading (pounds per acre per year) that are allowed. Nc felt that this <br />same criteria could be used for ours acid in his calculations it was found <br />that we are way under the requirement: that were set out in the Rice Creek <br />District on this development. <br />In talking to all of these various people .n reference Lo our situation it was <br />felt that there are iio problems in setting up systems that will purify and clean <br />the water on otiv particular project before it enters back into Lake Minnetonka. <br />Before any one of these parties could qive any definite approval they would have <br />to go into some depth study to preGare dor.uments that would back their opinion. <br />There is no question in my mind that it would not be difficult to set up systems <br />on your project that can release the water back into Lake Minnetonka at the same <br />quality as it presently is or even improving the water quality in the ponding <br />systems that wr have proposed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.