Laserfiche WebLink
WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT <br />TECHNICAL EVALUATION PANEL <br />FINDINGS OF FACT <br />Date: October 24 2000 LGU: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District <br />County: Hennepin LGU Contact: __,,_Jim~H""""afu=er"----------- <br />Project Name/#: Van Eeckhout Phone #: -'('""'9"""52=.,)'--'4'-'-7~1--"'0=59~0'-------- <br />Location of Project: Tl 17N R23W 03 NW 1/4 ofNW 1/4 Orono Hennepin <br />Township, Range, Section, Qtr. Section, Lot/Block, City, County <br />TEP Members (and others) who reviewed project: <br />(Check if viewed project site) <br />(X) SWCD: David Thill (X) BWSR: . ..,,D~o,.,,u:1:,.g.,:cSn,,.yc,,d::e!er'------------ <br />(X ) LGU: Jim Hafuer <br />Other Wetland Experts present: ___________________ _ <br />TEP requested by:,__:C~ity~o~f"°'Or=on'"'o"----------------------- <br />1. Type of TEP determination requested (check tho.re that app(y): <br />_1L Delineation check <br />2. <br />__ Exemption Determination (WCA Exemption# __) <br />No-Loss Determination <br />__ Replacement Plan <br />Description of Wetland with proposed impact: <br />a. Wetland Type (Circular 39). ______ _ (Cowardin) ____ _ <br />b. Size of Proposed Impact (tenths ofacre). _______________ _ <br />3. Have sequencing requirements been addressed?_ yes _ no <br />4. Is the project consistent with the intent of the comprehensive local water plan and/or the watershed district <br />plan, the metropolitan surface water management plan and metropolitan groundwater m.2llagement plan, and <br />local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance? Yes ( ) No ( ) <br />5. The project will affect the following wetland functions: <br />Functions <br />Floodwater Storage <br />Nutrient Assimilation <br />Sediment Entrapment <br />Groundwater Recharge <br />Low Flow Augmentation <br />Aesthetics/Recreation <br />Shoreland Anchoring <br />Wildlife Habitat . <br />Fisheries Habitat <br />Plant/Animal Habitat <br />Commercial Uses <br />No Impact Improve <br />6. For replacement plan or no-loss determinations, are wetland functions maintained at an equal or greater level? <br />Yes ( ) No ( ) <br />7. Does Technical Evaluation Panel recommend approval of the activity proposed in item 1.? <br />Yes(X) No() <br />Ifno, why? _____________________ _ <br />8. SIGNATURES (if TEP decision is not a consensus, note with an asterisk and explain on the back of this page) <br />~ .0 11/8/00 <br />SWCD Representative (Date) <br />~9~11/8/2000 <br />BWSR Representative (Date) <br />}~d~ 11/1/J.ooo <br />', 7--1-U..:.......;rep::...Z_;,;n,c;tattve::::· ___ (Date-1,r )