The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/30/2017 Env Board PacketCity of Lino Lakes Environmental Board Meeting August 30, 2017 6:30 p.m. AGENDA Pre-Meeting Site Visit at Distribution Alternatives, Clearwater Creek Business Park 5:30 1.Call to Order 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes 4. Open Mike 5.Action Items There are no Action Items 6.Discussion Items A. Distribution Alternatives Completed Project Discussion B. Blue Heron Days Event Summary Discussion C. Textiles Recycling Status Update and General Recycling Updates D. Wollan’s Park Wetland Bank UpdateE. Up-Coming Speakers and Agenda Items . 7. Adjourn DRAFT MINUTES CITY OF LINO LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MINUTES 1.CALL TO ORDER: Ms. Kaufenberg called the Lino Lakes Environmental Board meeting to order at 6:33 p.m. on July 27, 2017. 2.APPROVAL OF AGENDA: ADD: Discussion Item C. Peltier Lake Draw Down Mr. Sullivan made a MOTION to approve the amended Agenda. Ms. Holmes seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 26, 2017 Ms. Andrzejewski made a MOTION to approve the May 26, 2017 Meeting Minutes. Mr.Sullivan seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0. 4.OPEN MIKE Declared Open Mike at 6:35 p.m. Closed Open Mike at 6:36 p.m. 5.ACTION ITEMS A. All Season’s Rental: Preliminary Plat, Rezone and Conditional Use DATE : July 26, 2017 TIME STARTED : 6:33 P.M. TIME ENDED : 8:38 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Paula Andrzejewski, Liz Kaufenberg, Shawn Holmes, John Sullivan MEMBERS ABSENT : Steve Heiskary, Nancie Klebba, Alex Schwartz STAFF PRESENT : Marty Asleson, Diane Hankee DRAFT MINUTES The propose development is an expansion of the All Season’s Rental Business to an expanded adjacent area to the South. The owners Mr. Carlson and Mrs. Carlson are asking for Preliminary Plat review, a rezone from R-X, (Rural Executive) to GB (General Business). The project will need a conditional use permit, which will result in a Commercial Planned Unit Development planning process, and a permit for small engine repair. The site is located at 7932 Lake Dr. It consists of 2.23-acre parcels/1.6 acres of disturbed area. The existing and proposed impervious area is 0.73 acres and 1.4 acres respectively. Mr. Carlson has a concrete batch plant existing on the site. The owner will submit plans for concrete devices to collect concrete mix spillage at the the beginning of the process and concrete washout collection at the end of the process. Mr. Carlson suggested that Mr. Asleson visited the site and discussed the concrete wash out area. In addition, there will be more wash out bays. Ms. Holmes wanted to know what happens at the concrete from the wash out area. Mr. Carlson said that all the concrete could be recycled after the product has dried out. In addition, the water can be reused in other batches of concrete. Mr. Sullivan thought adding the small engine repair a good addition to the business. Ms. Kaufenberg wanted to know if the irrigation system would include sensors. Mr. Carlson yes there will be sensors. Ms. Andrzejewski recommends forwarding the preliminary plat on to the Planning & Zoning Board and the City Council. Mr. Sullivan seconded the motion. Motion carried 4 -0. B. Natural Resources Revolving Fund Plan, Alison Harwood of WSB & Associates. Ms. Harwood presented the Natural Resources Revolving Fund Plan findings highlighting the topics below •Background •Purpose & Goals •Existing Bank Sites •Site Selection Criteria •Individual Site Review •Credit Compensation •Recommendations DRAFT MINUTES Woolans Park has wetland credits just under 6 acres. Land in the area would be selling for about $2 per square foot. Site 1 Winters property – all farm land be resorted to the original wetlands Site 2 Northeast Drainage area - farmland that would need to be re stored and created wetlands Site 3 Otter Lake – and a tamarack area nearby Mr. Asleson mentioned that there is an occupied osprey pole on this piece of land Site 4 12th Ave property - is drained farmland. Therefore, it will need to be restores and plug some of the drainage channels Site 5 Pine Glen Outlot E - this site was partly drained so there would be altering or plugging up some of the drainage tile. Site 6 Wollans Park II - adjacent land has some endangered plants in this area Recommendations •Future studies need to be done - Wetland delineations, botanical surveys, MnRAM assessments, and hydrology studies •Coordination with agencies – Rice Creek Watershed District , US Army Corps of Engineers, Board of Water and Soil Resources, Anoka Conservation District •Wetland bank pricing – Fee to be set annually, based on current market conditions •Revolving fund – fund future maintenance of the established wetland bank,fund land acquisition for future bank sites, fund construction/restoration of future bank sites. Ms. Kaufenberg so the sell price of wetland bank credits is done every year. Ms. Harwood explained that yes, that is why it best to evaluate annually the price of wetland credits Mr. Sullivan how close are we to selling Wollans wetland credits- Mr. Asleson we could sell the wetland credits now if we wanted to and use that credit to buy one of the sites that we have just discussed DRAFT MINUTES Ms. Andrzejewski made a motion to approve the Natural Resources Revolving Fund plan and make a recommendation to send this on to City Council. Ms. Holmes seconded. Motion 4 – 0. C. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update, WSB & Associates Ms. Hankee presented the Open House feedback from the June 22, 2017 public meeting and the community visioning survey results. Comments by Topic/Issue Area •Land Use •Utilities(sewer, water, storm drainage •Transportation •Parks & natural resources Request for changes affecting specific properties/locations You can find the results of the Lino Lakes City survey and see the blog. a. Natural Resources and Amenities Goals and Polices Ms. Harwood presented the comments on natural resources, which were to encourage the restoration of Cedar Lake with good trails and public access The City’s Resource Management System Plan has goals, policies and plans in place and helps with the development within the city. This is where the Natural Resources Revolving Fund be added to the comp plan. Ms. Kaufenberg wondered would connecting our trails be in the comp plan Ms. Harwood replied that would be more for the park and trail system. Mr. Sullivan was concerned in directing funds for protecting resources – how can we direct City Council to fund more of these natural resources. Also the need for education on recycling, no grass clippings in the streets. Ms. Kaufenberg would like to see organics goals and native plantings in the comp plan Ms. Holmes would like to see education to land owners that abut the lakes Mr. Asleson said the Rice Creek Watershed handles the information and education of the shoreland property owners. Ms. Andrzejewski says that education can be creative and simple to do DRAFT MINUTES b.Local Surface Water Management Ms. Thompson presented the Local Water Management Plan; updated in 2015 and needs updating again because of the comp plan updates. Moreover, it now will be a chapter in the comp plan and not a reference. Rice Creek Watershed District new rules that implemented in 2017 and the new floodplain modeling. In addition, the Vadnais Lakes Area Watershed Management Watershed Management Plan last updated in 2016. Along with the new TMDL that are in effect. A lot of the goals and policies are derived from state statute are to protect, preserve and manage the use of the natural and surface ground water. This is the time to do the update. Because you now have a chance to promote the projects that, you want to pursue. Last update previously identified issues with areas of ground water management, erosion and sediment control, the public drainage system among other items. •It also identified actions for better site design techniques for developers. •Coordinate with RCWD/VLAWMO to review wetlandimpact/replacements and establish watershed-based approaches andwetland bank •Work with RCWD/VLAWMO to address flow constraints •Work with RCWD and private landowners to maintain, improve, orabandon public ditch system, as needed or desired. •Implement multi-function greenway corridor rather than perpetuating the subsurface ditch system. •Partner with RCWD/VLAWMO for public engagement activities, grantopportunities, and habitat preservation projects In the new plan should include new actions to address the TMDL and those could be ordinances, policies and public education. We are require to implement the new Watershed District floodplain modeling. Making sure the sanitation system is functioning properly. Among other items. Mr. Sullivan how fast can we see action with our plans and in order to keep the drainage system open and staff to maintain the waterways, this maybe the opportunity to get better funding for these areas. Ms. Thompson mentioned that working with the schools and have students go out and take water samples of area lakes would be a good education opportunity. This could be done with help from RCWSD as part of their outreach and public education. DRAFT MINUTES Ms. Andrzejewski asked about the NE drainage system. Ms. Thompson it is not city owned and is working with the landowners for a better drainage system and adding a greenway corridor Ms. Kaufenberg instead of coming up with general ideas can we be or specific areas in the city Ms. Thompson mentioned the city has done some work with residents such as rain gardens There was other discussions on education of well owners, ground water level and septic systems. 6.DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Recycling Updates Mr. Alseson announced the new recycling intern will start August 15 B. Blue Heron Days Parade Next month on Saturday, August 19 is the Blue Heron Parade and the Environmental Board is the last unit in the parade which starts at 11:00am. Those that can make it will meet on the east side of Target C. Pelitier Lake Draw Down Peliter Lake is scheduled again to draw down in mid September until it reaches 2.8 inches below normal in about 60 days. There will be a simular meeting as last year on August 16 at Wargo at 5:00pm. D. Shocking Carp barrier maybe installed between Rice Lake and Baldwin Lake 7.ADJOURNMENT Mr. Sullivan made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 8:38 pm. Ms. Andrzejewski supported motion. Motion carried 4 - 0. Respectfully submitted, Mary Fogarty Office Specialist 1 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD AGENDA ITEM 6A STAFF ORIGINATOR: Marty Asleson, Environmental Coordinator MEETING DATE: TOPIC: August 30, 2017 Clearwater Creek Business Park/United Properties/Distribution Alternatives/Revisit BACKGROUND Clearwater Creek Business Park was reviewed by the Environmental Board on July 29, 2016. Recommendations made at that meeting are included in the packet, along with relevant construction documents. A post construction site visit is scheduled for August 30, 2017. We will meet onsite at 5:30. ENVIRONMENTAL DIRECTION None Required. Environmental Board comments will be given to the Community Development Director. ATTACHMENTS 1. Construction Plans 2. Environmental Board Recommendations 3. Conservation Easement.  Page 1 Memo To: Katie Larsen From: Marty Asleson Date: June 29, 2016 Re: Environmental Board Recommendations for the Clearwater Creek Business Park Proposal The following recommendations were made by the Environmental Board on June 29 Clearwater Creek Business Park 1. Soils should be monitored for impacts to the Drinking Water Service area contamination, and existing wetland resources. Impacts can be created by uncovering a “gravel-vein” or sand seams where polluted water can enter into a DWSMA water source, and where wetlands can be drained by creating a “drain situation” for close proximity wetlands. Gravel and or other pervious areas encountered in excavation areas for ponds and created wetlands and general excavation must be sealed 2. The applicant must provide a detailed tree preservation plan to the city. 3. Landscaping: A. Plants that are intolerant of higher pH soils should not be used on this site. B. Evergreens must not be used in any of the native seed mix areas. Evergreens may be planted in the sod and any irrigated cultured seed areas C. MNDOT seeding methods as in the MNDOT Seeding Manual must be used for Native seed areas. D. Native Seed areas must be planted and maintained by a City approved contractor that has experience and knowledge in the planting of a native seed area E. A 5-year maintenance plan must be written for the site and accepted by the City F. All cultured seed and sod areas must be irrigated. G. Seed types must be identified on the landscape plan. H. Seed types must be approved by the City. I. Evergreens must not be planted in native seed areas. Environmental  Page 2 4. AUAR A. A buffer on the south side of the ditch/creek be extended between the top of the bank to the ponding areas to the south or 150 feet with a minimum buffer distance of approximately 20 feet where buffer capability narrows with proposed infrastructure. The 50’ buffer area on the north side of the creek should be measured from Top of Bank. Additional buffer will be determined when the north outlot is planned developed. All buffer areas must be placed under a Conservation Easement. B. That in harmony with the intent of the AUAR, a surface water treatment train be further established by eliminating the pipe going from the ponds to the creek, and a filtration system be established from overflow from the ponds in the buffer area south of the creek. Engineering drawings must be submitted that encompass this filtration system and the area planted with a seed mix approved by the City. Engineering drawings for the intended function of this filtration system must be approved by the City Engineers. C. A Phase One Archeological Study must be performed. D. All other AUAR requirements and concerns listed in WSB document from Diane Hankee PE, City Engineer regarding the Clearwater Creek Business Park Plan Review for AUAR Conformance , WSB Project No. 2029-820 be addressed. 5. Lighting must be low-intensity, non-spilling, with fixture lenses that cut-off glare. All lights should be LED. 6. Since this is in a moderate susceptibility to groundwater contamination area, drinking water protection must be provided throughout the construction process. All fueling units must be within containment structures, i.e., fueling tanks must be in a containment area. All Concrete washout must be contained and disposed of off-site. 7. The submitted plan is site specific. The developer is responsible for all aspects of the MPCA requirements for construction site sediment and erosion control. There must not be any disturbance of the soils on this site until the SWIPP is fully engaged and authorized by City environmental and engineering. 5. A tree protection plan must be submitted 6. A P-8 analysis must be performed for the site  Page 3 PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE CLEARWATER CREEK BUSINESS PARK PROJECT Lino Lakes, Anoka County, MN August 2016 PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE CLEARWATER CREEK BUSINESS PARK PROJECT Lino Lakes, Anoka County, MN 106 Group Project No. 2207-1911 SUBMITTED TO: United Properties 3600 American Blvd W. #750 Minneapolis, MN 55431 SUBMITTED BY: 106 Group 1295 Bandana Blvd #335 St Paul MN 55108 PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR & REPORT AUTHOR: Madeleine Bray, M.A., RPA August 2016 Clearwater Creek Business Park Project Phase I Archaeological Survey Page i MANAGEMENT SUMMARY In July 2016, The 106 Group Ltd. (106 Group) conducted a Phase I archaeological survey for the Clearwater Creek Business Park project. The proposed project consists of the construction of a 402,552 square foot warehouse and the extension of 21st Avenue South in the city of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota. The survey was conducted under contract with United Properties. The project area is located on privately-owned land. At this time, the project is not subject to state or federal permitting or funding. In 2004-2005, the 106 Group prepared a cultural resources assessment in support of the Interstate 35E (I- 35E) Corridor Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). The assessment identified areas within the AUAR study area with a high potential to contain archaeological sites, which include the portion of the current project area lying within 500 feet of Clearwater Creek. The final AUAR Mitigation Plan requires that Phase I archaeological survey be conducted in areas of high archaeological potential. Therefore, this Phase I archaeological resources investigation has been prepared in compliance with the AUAR Mitigation Plan to determine whether the project area contains previously recorded that have been identified since the AUAR study or unrecorded archaeological resources that may be potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The project area is located in the southwest quarter of Section 24, Township 31N, Range 22W, in the city of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota, and includes approximately 42.5 acres (17.2 hectares) within the Central Lakes Deciduous East archaeological region. The project area is bounded by Cedar Street to the south, I-35E to the east, and Clearwater Creek to the north. The archaeological investigation consisted of a review of documentation of previously recorded sites within one mile (1.6 kilometers [km]) of the project area as well as a Phase I archaeological survey of the project area to identify any archaeological sites. Madeleine Bray, M.A., RPA served as principal investigator During the Phase I archaeological investigation, the 106 Group identified no archaeological sites within the project area. The 106 Group recommends no further work. Clearwater Creek Business Park Project Phase I Archaeological Survey Page ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 1 2.0 METHODS .......................................................................................... 3 2.1 Objectives .................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Background Research ................................................................................................. 3 2.3 Field Methods .............................................................................................................. 3 2.3.1 Pedestrian Survey ........................................................................................................... 4 2.3.2 Shovel Testing ................................................................................................................. 4 3.0 LITERATURE SEARCH ........................................................................ 5 3.1 Previous Archaeological Studies and Sites .................................................................. 5 3.2 Historical Map Review ................................................................................................. 5 3.3 Environmental History Overview .................................................................................. 5 4.0 RESULTS and RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................... 6 APPENDIX A: PROJECT PERSONNEL ........................................................ 9 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. PROJECT LOCATION ................................................................................................................................. 2 FIGURE 2. OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT AREA FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER, FACING NORTHEAST. ... 6 FIGURE 3. RESULTS .................................................................................................................................................... 7 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN 1 MILE OF THE PROJECT AREA ......... 5 Clearwater Creek Business Park Project Phase I Archaeological Survey 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION In July 2016, The 106 Group Ltd. (106 Group) conducted a Phase I archaeological survey for the Clearwater Creek Business Park project. The proposed project consists of the construction of a 402,552 square foot warehouse and the extension of 21st Avenue South in the city of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota. The survey was conducted under contract with United Properties. The project area is located on privately-owned land. At this time, the project is not subject to state or federal permitting or funding. In 2004-2005, the 106 Group prepared a cultural resources assessment in support of the Interstate 35E (I- 35E) Corridor Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) (Ketz and Vermeer 2005). The assessment identified areas within the AUAR study area with a high potential to contain archaeological sites, which included approximately 18 acres of the current project area lying within 500 feet of Clearwater Creek (Figure 1). The final AUAR Mitigation Plan requires that Phase I archaeological survey be conducted in areas of high archaeological potential (City of Lino Lakes 2005). Therefore, this Phase I archaeological resources investigation has been prepared in compliance with the AUAR Mitigation Plan to determine whether the project area contains previously recorded that have been identified since the AUAR study or unrecorded archaeological resources that may be potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The project area is located in the southwest quarter of Section 24, Township 31N, Range 12W, in the city of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota, and includes approximately 42.5 acres (17.2 hectares) within the Central Lakes Deciduous East archaeological region. The project area is bounded by Cedar Street to the south, I-35E to the east, and Clearwater Creek to the north (Figure 1). The archaeological investigation consisted of a review of documentation of previously recorded sites within one mile (1.6 kilometers [km]) of the project area as well as a Phase I archaeological field survey to identify any archaeological sites within the construction limits of the project area. The archaeological survey consisted of: • a visual inspection of the entire project area, • systematic pedestrian surface survey of areas within the project area characterized by adequate (greater than 25 percent) surface visibility, and • shovel testing of areas within the project area characterized by moderate potential to contain archaeological resources and poor (less than 25 percent) ground surface visibility. The following report describes project methodology, environmental setting, previous investigations, results, and recommendations for the project area. Because no archaeological resources were encountered during the survey the inclusion of cultural contexts would be extraneous to the report; therefore, none are presented here. Madeleine Bray, M.A., RPA served as principal investigator and the fieldwork was supervised by Justin Olson, M.A., RPA, and Tyler Lund-Kyrola, B.A. (See Appendix A for a list of project personnel). 21AN0130 21WAj 21WAk 21WAl 21WAm Project Location Project Area AUAR - identified Area of High Archaeological Potential One Mile Context Study Area Previously Identified Archaeology Site Figure 1 Clearwater Creek Business Park Project Phase I Archaeological Survey Lino Lakes, Anoka County, MN Map Produced by 106 Group 8/4/2016Source: 106 Group 0300Meters 0 875 Feet 1:17,000 Service Layer Credits: Copyright:' 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed Project AreaAnokaCounty Chisago County DakotaCounty Hennepin County IsantiCounty Ramsey County ScottCounty Washington County PierceCounty Polk County St. CroixCounty Clearwater Creek Business Park Project Phase I Archaeological Survey 3 2.0 METHODS 2.1 Objectives The primary objective of the archaeological investigation was to determine whether the area to be affected by the proposed project possesses any intact archaeological resources, and if so, whether those resources are potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP. All work was conducted in accordance with the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (MnHPO) Manual for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota (Anfinson 2005), and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation (48 Federal Register 44716-44740, National Park Service [NPS] 1983). 2.2 Background Research As part of the cultural resources assessment for the I-35E Corridor AUAR, in November of 2004, the 106 Group conducted background research at MnHPO to identify archaeological sites within one mile (1.6 km) of the project area and on surveys previously conducted within the project area. In addition, online research was conducted to locate historical aerial photographs and historical maps. On July 15, 2016, prior to the start of the field survey, staff from the 106 Group conducted updated background research at MnHPO in order to identify previously identified sites and surveys that had been placed on file at MnHPO since the time of the 2004 literature review. 2.3 Field Methods 2.3.1 VISUAL ASSESSMENT During the field survey, members of the 106 Group archaeological field crew visually assessed all portions of the project area to verify the AUAR’s assessment of archaeological potential within the project area. Intensive field investigation focused on areas assessed as possessing greater potential to contain significant, intact archaeological resources. These areas included undisturbed portions of the project area: • located within 500 feet (ft.) (150 meters [m]) of an existing or former water source of 40 acres (19 ha) or greater in extent, or within 500 ft. (150 m) of a former or existing perennial stream; • located on topographically prominent landscape features; • located within 300 ft. (100 m) of a previously reported site; or • located within 300 ft. (100 m) of a former or existing historical structure or feature (such as a building foundation or cellar depression). Areas characterized by a relatively low potential for containing archaeological resources included disturbed or inundated areas, former or existing wetland areas, poorly drained areas, and areas with a 20 percent or greater slope. Areas assessed as low potential were not investigated further. Clearwater Creek Business Park Project Phase I Archaeological Survey 4 2.3.2 PEDESTRIAN SURVEY Pedestrian survey was conducted in areas identified during the visual assessment as exhibiting a greater potential to contain intact archaeological deposits where 25 percent or more of the surface was visible. Due to the efficiency of the methodology, pedestrian survey was also conducted in portions of the survey area outside of the locations identified as possessing greater archaeological potential where 25 percent or more of the surface was visible. Pedestrian survey was employed to ascertain whether archaeological sites or above-ground features, such as earthworks or abandoned structural foundations, were present within the survey area. Pedestrian survey transects were placed 15 m (50 ft.) apart to ensure adequate coverage of the ground surface. 2.3.3 SHOVEL TESTING Shovel tests were excavated in areas identified during the visual assessment or pedestrian survey as exhibiting greater potential to contain intact archaeological deposits where less than 25 percent of the soil surface was visible. Tests were small, circular excavations, measuring approximately 35-45 centimeters (cm) in diameter. A single transect with a 10-m (33-ft.) testing interval was employed for most shovel tests. All excavated soil matrices were passed through ¼-inch hardware mesh to ensure the consistent recovery of artifacts. Tests were excavated down to the level of culturally sterile subsoil. Survey data were recorded through standardized forms and the field director’s daily log. Recorded information included test locations and methods of testing; the numbers, types, and locations of recovered cultural materials; the depth of shovel tests and the thickness of excavated soil layers; soil textures and inclusions (both natural and cultural); and soil color according to Munsell color charts. Clearwater Creek Business Park Project Phase I Archaeological Survey 5 3.0 LITERATURE SEARCH 3.1 Previous Archaeological Studies and Sites Research indicates that aside from the 2005 AUAR cultural resources assessment (Ketz and Vermeer 2005; summarized in the Introduction), no archaeological studies have been previously conducted within the project area. Three studies have been conducted within one mile of the project area. No previously identified sites are located within the project area. However, one site has been recorded (field confirmed) and four sites have been reported (not field confirmed) within one mile of the project area (Table 1, Figure 1). All five of the previously recorded sites, including the previously recorded site (21AN130) and reported sites (21WAj, 21WAk, 21WAl, and 21WAm) consist of collections of precontact artifacts at the Minnesota Historical Society whose approximate locations were recorded based on information from informants. Table 1. Previously Identified Archaeological Sites within 1 Mile of the Project Area Site No. Site Name T R S ¼ Section Description NRHP Status 21WAj - 31N 21W 18 - Landowner Collection – Precontact artifact scatter Not Evaluated 21WAk - 31N 21W 30 E-NW, E-SW Landowner Collection – Precontact artifact scatter Not Evaluated 21WAl - 31N 21W 30 SW-NW Landowner Collection – Precontact artifact scatter Not Evaluated 21WAm - 31N 21W 30 W-SW Landowner Collection – Precontact artifact scatter Not Evaluated 21AN130 Iverson I 31N 22W 25 NE Landowner Collection – Precontact artifact scatter Not Evaluated 3.2 Historical Map Review A review of the General Land Office (GLO) plat map from 1848 (GLO 1848), historical plat maps from 1887 and 1914 (Foote 1887, Webb Publishing Co. 1914), as well as the 1902 White Bear 15-minute and 1952 Centerville 7.5-minute USGS topographic maps and historical aerial photographs from 1938 (University of Minnesota 2016), did not indicate any past structures within the project area. 3.3 Environmental History Overview The project area is generally very level and consists primarily of agricultural fields, with some trees and aquatic vegetation near Clearwater Creek, which bounds the project site to the north. Geologically, the project area lies within the Aitkin Lacustrine Plain, Silty geomorphic region. The project area is within the LLPD soil landscape unit, described as deep silt or loamy, poorly drained, dark colored soils. The LLPD soil landscape unit makes up approximately 1 percent of the Twin Cities Formation, Loamy, Rolling geomorphic region (Agricultural Experiment Station 1980). The primary soil association for the survey area includes the Blomford loamy fine sand, with other soil units being Dundas loam, Loamy wet sand, Nessel fine sandy loam, and Webster loam (USDA 2016). Clearwater Creek Business Park Project Phase I Archaeological Survey 6 4.0 RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Staff from the 106 Group conducted a Phase I archaeological survey of the project area on July 13 and 20, 2016. Approximately 39.8 acres were characterized by plowed fields with 100 percent visibility, and were therefore subject to systematic pedestrian survey in 15-meter (50 feet) intervals (Figures 2 and 3). Approximately 1.2 acres were visually assessed to be highly disturbed by roads or irrigation ditches and were, therefore, identified as having a low archaeological potential and not surveyed further (Figure 3). An additional 0.8 acres were inundated by water and not surveyed. The remaining 0.8 acres, located along Clearwater Creek, were overgrown with trees and aquatic vegetation and exhibited low (less than 25 percent) visibility. Because of the proximity to the creek and low surface visibility, 21 shovel tests were excavated at 10-m intervals within the 0.8-acre area adjacent to the creek. Excavated shovel tests ranged in depth from 21 cm to 100 cm below surface. All shovel tests yielded negative results. Since no archaeological resources were identified in the survey area, the 106 Group recommends that no further work is necessary. Figure 2. Overview of the project area from the southwest corner, facing northeast. 35E 22nd Ave S140th St N20th AveSGateway Cir Cedar St E Phelps Rd O tterLakeRdResults Project Area Shovel Test Pedestrian Survey Visual Assessment Inundated Area Figure 3 Clearwater Creek Business Park Project Phase I Archaeological Survey Lino Lakes, Anoka County, MN Map Produced by 106 Group 8/2/2016Source: 106 Group 0 60 Meters 0 180 Feet 1:3,500 Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, increment P Corp., NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), MapmyIndia, ' OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Cl e a r w a t e r C r e e k Clearwater Creek Business Park Project Phase I Archaeological Survey 8 REFERENCES CITED Agricultural Experiment Station 1980 Minnesota Soil Atlas: Stillwater Sheet. Miscellaneous Report #171. Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Minnesota, St. Paul. City of Lino Lakes 2005 I-35E Corridor Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). September 26, 2005. Foote, C. M. & Company 1887 Map of Ramsey and Washington Counties with adjacent parts of Anoka, Dakota, & Hennepin Counties, and parts of St. Croix and Pierce Counties, Wisconsin. C. M. Foote & Company, Minneapolis. Ketz, K. Anne, and Andrea C. Vermeer 2005 Cultural Resources Assessment for the I-35 E Corridor Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR), Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota. Prepared for Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc. General Land Office [GLO] 1848 Public Land Survey Plat Map of Township 31N, Range 22W. http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/search/. Accessed on July 14, 2016. National Park Service [NPS] 1983 Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation. Federal Register 48(190):44716-44740. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Web Soil Survey. http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/ Accessed on July 14, 2016. University of Minnesota 2016 Minnesota Historical Aerial Photographs Online. https://www.lib.umn.edu/apps/mhapo/, accessed June 27, 2016. Webb Publishing Co. 1914 Atlas and Farmer’s Director of Anoka County and Eleven Northern Townships of Hennepin County. Webb Publishing Co., Saint Paul, Minnesota. APPENDIX A: PROJECT PERSONNEL LIST OF PERSONNEL Project Manager Adam Kaeding, Ph.D., RPA Principal Investigator Madeleine Bray, M.A., RPA Crew Chief Justin Olson, M.A., RPA Field Archaeologists Tyler Lund-Kyrola, B.A Charles Peliska, B.A Jason Rufledt, B.A. Graphics and GIS Molly McDonald, M.S.