Lake Flora Restoration Scoping Document

7/29/2019 Lake Flora Restoration Scoping Document

1/10

Lake Flora Restoration ProjectLake Park, Min neso ta

PROJECTSLOPINGDOCUMENTLAKEFLORARESTORATIONPROJECT

Lake Park, Minnesota

UEI roject No.: R13.00357

September 2013

I hereby c e r t i f y that h i s plan, p e c i f i c a t i o n , or report was repared by me r under myd i r e c t supervision, an d that I am duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the lawsof the t a t e of Minnesota.

DRAFTKristopher R . arlson, .E. DateMN e g i s t r a t i o n No. 7082

Ulteig Engineers, nc .1041 Hawk t r e e t

D e t r o i t Lakes, Minnesota 56502

D e t r o i t Lakes,MN Minneapolis,MN Fargo,ND Bismarck,ND i l l i s t o n ,NDSioux a l l s ,SD Cedar Rapids,IA Denver,CO


2/10

Lake FloraRestoration ProjectLakeP a r k,Min n e s o t a

PROJECTSLOPINGDOCUMENTLAKEFLORA RESTORATIONPROJECT

Lake Park, Mi nneso t a

UEIrojectNo .: 813.00357

TABLEOFCONTENTS

1 . 0 PROJECTOVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 . 0 ALTERNATIVESANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 . 0 RECOMMENDEDALTERNATIVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44.0 ENVIRONMENTALOVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65.0 FUNDINGOPTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76.0 PROJECTIMPLEMENTATIONSTRATEGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

UEI r o j e c t No.: 813.00357Page


3/10

Lake Flora Restoration ProjectLake Park, i n nes o ta

1 .0 PROJECTOVERVIEW

Lake Flora was an estimated 1 0 foot deep, 40 acre lake t h a t was ocated in th enortheast corner of the City of Lake Park. Somet i me in the early 1 9 0 0 ' s , what snow known s Becker C ou n t y Drain 7 as onstructed to drain the lake to allowfor the construction of the r a i l r o a d t h a t passes through the C i t y . Currently, thearea that was known as Lake Flora i s being oc cupied with a c i t y park, baseballan d o f t b a l l f i e l d s , an d wetlands.

In the F a l l of 2012, the City of Lake Park began working with the MinnesotaDesign Team o explore the p o s s i b i l i t y an d b e n e f i t of r e s t o r i n g Lake F l o r a . Oneof the s i g n i f i c a n t findings outlined in the Minnesota Design Team's study wasthe C i t y ' s d e s i r e an d need for more public space an d r e c r e a t i o n options withinthe City with o n e of the key eatures being Lake l o r a .

Additionally, with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR)o b j e c t i v e of extending the Heartland S t a t e T r a i l f r o m Park Rapids to Mo o r head,the City of Lake Park h as completed a B i c y c l e F a c i l i t y Study t o analyzea l t e r n a t i v e s to route the t r a i l , as well as other future t r a i l s through the C i t y . Asi d e n t i f i e d in t h i s study, he Lake Flora area was he preferred l o c a t i o n t o connectthe Heartland S t a t e T r a i l with the City of Lake ark.

U l t e i gUEI r o j e c t No.: R13.00357

Page 1


4/10

Lake Flora Restoration P r o j e c tLake Park, Min ne so ta

2 . 0 ALTERNATIVESANALYSIS

The Mi n ne s o ta Design Team's study o u t l i n e d t wo o c a l l y p r e f e r r e d options t o beconsidered o r the Lake Flora a r e a . The l t e r n a t i v e s a r e :

Alternative No.1Lake lora RestorationThis a l t e r n a t i v e inc ludes the complete r e s t o r a t i o n of what was Lake F l o r a . Inaddition t o the complete r e s t o r a t i o n of t he l a k e , the study a l s o i d e n ti f i e d thefollowing e a t u r e s :

o Heartland S t a t e T r a i l Connectiono City Parko Beach Areao Lake a v i l i o no Scenic O ver l o ok

UEI r o j e c t No.: R13.00357Page2


5/10

Lake Flora Restoration P r o j e c tLake Park,Mi n nes o ta

Alternative No.2Lake lora Wetland T r a i lThis a l t e r n a t i v e incl udes the p a r t i a l r e s t o r a t i o n of what was Lake F l o r a . Inaddition t o the p a r t i a l r e s t o r a t i o n of the l a k e , the s t udy a l s o i d e n t i f i e d thefollowing e a t u r e s :

o Heartland S t a t e T r a i l Connectiono I n t e r p r e t i v e T r a i l Boardwalko City Parko Lake Decko Nature Center

UEI roject No.: R13.00357Page3


6/10

Lake Flora Restoration P r o j e c tLake Park, Mi n nes o ta

3 . 0 RECOMMENDEDALTERNATIVE

As ar t of the up f ront e s e a r c h f o r t h i s p r o j e c t , we met with r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s f r o mthe B u f f a l o-Red River Watershed D i s t r i c t an d Becker S o i l an d WaterConservation D i s t r i c t t o d i s c u s s the t w o l t e r n a t i v e s o u t l i n e d above.Some f thet o p i c s covered in t h i s d i s c u s s i o n included the e x i s t i n g hydrology, ecker C o u n t yDrain No . 7 n d p o t e n t i a l regulatory an d permitting i s s u e s t h a t the City couldf a c e as they move orward with t h i s p r o j e c t .

Existing H, rologyW i t h l l of the changes h a t have occurred s i n c e the e a r l y 1 9 0 0 ' s , the c o n s t r u c t i o nof Becker C o u n t y Drain No .7 n d the R a i l r o a d , the e x i s t i n g watershed f o r whato n ce w as Lake Flora has been reduced t o approximately 80 c r e s . In a d d i t i o n t othe small watershed, the e l e v a t i o n of w ha t o n ce w as Lake Flora i s s i g n i f i c a n t l yhigher than the other bodies of water i n the a r e a , w h i c h could i n d i c a t e t h a t thewater s u r f a c e may have f l u c t u a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y with the seasons an d evenp o s s i b l y have dr y up uring extended dr y p e r i o d s .

Based o n the e x i s t i n g hydrology, t h e r e ar e major concerns with being a b l e t oachieve the o b j e c t i v e s o u t l i n e d in A l t e r n a t i v e No. Lake lora R e s t o r a t i o n .Becker C o u n t y Drain No.7Becker C o u n t y Drain No.7was constructed t o lower the water l e v e l s of whatw as Lake Flora to allow f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n of the r a i l r o a d . Since t h i s i s now al e g a l d r a i n , i t f a l l s under the j u r i s d i c t i o n of the B u f f a l o-Red River WatershedD i s t r i c t , meaning t h a t t h e r e ar e r e s t r i c t i o n s o n what can be d o n e with i t . Thats a i d , t h e r e i s a process outlined i n Watershed Law o r abandoning a l e g a l d r a i n ,but the drawback s t h a t t can take 12 18 o n t h s o complete.

A l t e r n a t i v e l y , t h e r e are a l s o provisions in Watershed Law h a t w o u l d allow f o rthe c o n s t r u c t i o n of a water c o n t r o l s t r u c t u r e b y permit, t h a t w o u l d n o t r e q u i r ethe l e g a l drain to be abandoned. Th e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a water c o n t r o l s t r u c t u r ew o u l d provide the City c o n t r o l of the water leaving the s i t e , w h i c h in t u r n ,w o u l d give the hydrology needed t o achieve the o b j e c t i v e s o u t l i n e d inA l t e r n a t i v e No.2 Lake l o r a Wetland r a i l .



7/10

Lake Flora Restoration ProjectLake Park, Min neso ta

Permittin sluesSince the major c o mpo nent s of t h i s p r o j e c t deal with c o n t r o l l i n g the watersurface elevation an d excavation withi n w ha t was n e time known s Lake l o r a ,the wetland permittin g process s going to be the c o n t r o l l i n g f a c t o r on what thef i n a l a l t e r n a t i v e ultimately w i l l l o ok i k e .

Sinc e the proposed p r o j e c t includes excavation within an e x i s t i n g wetland an dthe p o t e n t i a l r e s t o r a t i o n of a previously drained wetland; we f e e l that theo b j e c t i v e s of Alternate No.2 Lake lora Wetland T r a i l could have i g n i f i c a n t l yl e s s opposition f r o m each of the permitting agencies. That a i d , depending on het o t a l acreage of x i s t i n g wetlands impacted by he p r o j e c t versus that amount fwetland able t o restored/ c r e a t e d , there may be an opportunity for the City t o s e tup a wetland bank that could be used on uture p r o j e c t s .

Recommended lternativeBased on he preliminary findings outlined above, he re c o m m e n de d a l t e r n a t i v ew o u l d be Alternative No.2 Lake lora Wetland T r a i l .



8/10

Lake Flora Restoration P r o j e c tLake Park, M i n n e s o t a

4 . 0 ENVIRONMENTALOVERVIEW

WetlandsConstruction of the proposed p r o j e c t w i l l a f f e c t a s i g n i f i c a n t amo u n t of e x i s t i n gwetlands, l l of w h i c h ar e l o c a t e d within the area previously occupied by LakeF l o r a . Based u p o n past experience w i t h these types of p r o j e c t s , i t i s highlyrecommended t h a t the City reach o u t to an d f o r m a Technical Committee, w h i c hw o u l d include r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s f r o m the Becker S o i l an d Water ConservationD i s t r i c t , US Army o r p s of En gineers an d Minnesota Board of Water an d S o i lResources. Thi s Committee w o u l d be involved during the conceptual designphase t o review an d provide feedback o n proposed design elements an d howthey w o u l d r e l a t e t o the i n a l wetland permit.Environmental AssessmentDepending on he requirements of an y Local, t a t e , o r Federal F u nd i n g sourcesused by the City f o r the development an d c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h i s p r o j e c t , a formalEnvironmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW) ay be r e q u i r e d . To ensure thesm o o t h d e l i v e r y of h i s p r o j e c t , t i s recommended t h a t the p r o j e c t team reach o u tt o the S t a t e H i s t o r i c a l Preservation O f f i c e (SHPO) an d the MinnesotaDepartment of Natural Resources(DNR) o evaluate an d i d e n t i f y an y items ofh i s t o r i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e an d/ o r an y a r e o r endangered plant or animal p e c i e s t h a tmay e n the r e a .Permits an d Approval RequirementsPermits an d/ o r approvals are requi red by the following a g e n c i e s :

o Minnesota DNR Minnesota Local/ S t a t e/Federal Application f o rWater/Wetlands r o j e c t s

o USArmy o r p s of Engineer's S e c t i o n 404 Permito Becker S o i l an d Water Conservation D i s t r i c t Wetland Conservation

Ac to Minnesota o l l u t i o n C ontrol A ge n c y General Stormwater Permito City of Lake Park P lan R ev iew an d Appr o val

UEI roject N o .: R13.00357Page6


9/10

Lake Flora Restoration P r o j e c tLake Park, Minnesota

5 . 0 FUNDINGOPTIONS

Due o the nature an d scope of the proposed p r o j e c t , there are p o t e n t i a l fundingsources h a t w o u ld be v a i l a b l e f o r the C i t y .

DNR ar k an d T r a i l Legacy Grant F u n d i n gSince t h i s i s a park an d t r a i l type p r o j e c t , the City could apply o r grant fundingt h r o u g h the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Park an d Legacy GrantProgram. pplications o r the Park an d T r a i l Legacy Gran t u ndi n g o r the i s c a lYear 2014 are du e October 25 , 2013.West entral n i t i a t i v eSince t h i s i s a c o mmu n i t y type p r o j e c t , an d City of Lake Park i s a member fWest Central n i t i a t i v e , there wo u ld be an opportunity f o r the City t o wo rk withWest Central n i t i a t i v e ' s f u n d r a i s i n g ar m t o r a i s e the necessary money o coverthe C i t y ' s portion of the p r o j e c t .



10/10

Lake Flora Restorat ionP r o j e c tLakePar k, Mi n nes o t a

6 . 0 PROJECTIMPLEMENTATION

I f the City wi shesto moveo r war d withthe p e r m i t t i n g , design, an dc o n s t r u c t i o nof h i s p r o j e c t , t i s recommended the following ti me i n e be consider ed.

DNR ar kan d r a i l Legac y Gran t Applicat ion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O c t o b e r 2013I n i t i a t e West entral n i t i a t i v e ( I f Applicable) . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N o v e m b e r 2013C o m p l et e Wet l an dDel ineation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N o v e m b e r 2013C o ncep tual D es i g n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J a n u a r y 2014-March 2014Subm i t C o n cep t ual Desi g n o r Revi ew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mar c h 2014Submit Wet l and Permi t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . April 2014C o m p leteFin al Des i g n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J u n e 2014A c ceptBids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J u l y 2014C onstruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A u g u s t 2012-D ec ember 2014

*Pro p o sed t i m e l i n e w i l l be u b j e c t t o per mitting an d fun di n g

UEI r o j e c t No.: R13.00357Page S

Documents

Lake Flora Restoration Scoping Document