01-10-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ml H04-30I6 “Crcckslde in Orono" Januar} 7,200S Page S Stormwater Management: Status of MCWD Approval. Preliminary plat approval was granted for 7 lots predicated on the applicants ’ assertion tliat the site contains at least 14 acres of non-wetland area, and that the MCWD had accepted the wetland delineation, based on the provided delineation report and the findings of the TEP panel. The final plat submittals indicate a 40' x 470' corridor leading from Apple Glen Road to the formerly depicted wetland boundary, labeled as “EDGE OF WETLAND PER AGREEMENT W/MCWT>“. Tliis corridor was not shown as wetland on any preliminary plat drawings, and was not shown as wetland on the wetland delineation report provided to the City. Applicant indicates (See Exhibit K) tliat their discussions witli current MCWD staff this fall resulted in the requirement to protect this ditch as a linear wetland with 3 5' buffer required, and because it w as too late in the year to do a formal delineation, they were advised to designate a 40' wide corridor plus 3 5' easement in order to gain plan approval. Applicant is in the process of filing the required wclland/lmffer casements with Hennepin County to meet MCWD requirements. It is the applicant ’s consultant ’s conclusion that if delineated, the actual area of wetland within the ditch is minimal and will not reduce the total dry acreage below 14 acres. Note that the MCWD required 35' wetland buffers extend into Lots 2 thru 7; the only lot that is negatively impacted by such buffer is Lot 6, where the 3 5' buffer actually touches the rear wall ofthe conceptual proposed house on that lot. Lot 6 will likely need a revised house design to allow for a reasonably functional back yard... The project includes a 2-celI NURP stumiwatcr pond located at the rear of Lots 6 and 7. The normal w'atcr level of that pond is about 23' from the northeast comer ofthe conceptually proposed house on Lot 7. Again, careful home design is in order to provide a functional rear yard. No provisions have been specified in the covenants for maintenance of the Stonnwater Ponds. Tlus should be specified in the covenants as an obligation of the Homeowners Association. The applicant has advised that the MC WD pcmiits will be issued shortly. As of tliis writing I have not heard back from MCWD staff to confirm this. Developers Agreement. The Developers Agreement (in tliis case drafted by applicant ’s attorney based on our standard boilerplate, then adding specific revisions and additions) is being reviewed by staff and the City Attorney, as it contains a number of elements that are potentially problematic. Tlic key element for Council review is the applicant ’s desire to begin constmetion of a new home on Lot 3 (to replace the existing house) prior to completion ofthe road. See item 4e. on page 2 ofExhibit E-1.