Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #2039 <br />August 10, 1995 <br />Page 2 <br />Staff has enclosed the Covenant that was filed against the Chain of Titles of all propenies <br />with the Old Crystal Bay Road plats that had Type 1 or 2 wetlands that were not designated by <br />the City as protected wetlands. The policy established by the Council at the time of the review <br />was that wetlands of this type, if they were to be altered at some time in the future, were first <br />to receive the necessary approvals from the Corps. DNR and Watershed District before the City <br />would deal with the required land use review . Both the Watershed and Corps of Engineers arc <br />in the process of reviewing the application. As the wetland is not a protected wetland of the <br />DNR, they will not be involved in this review. The Watershed District confirms little concern <br />with the proposal. The Corps permit may require a more lengthy review if applicants are <br />required to file an individual permit which will take 90 days. As of this writing, we have heard <br />no confirmation from the Corps as to whether this will be reviewed as an individual permit or <br />a nationwide permit. A nationwide permit is a speedier review process that can be completed <br />within a month’s time. The nationwide permit involves alteration of '-6 acre or less of wetland <br />area. Individual permits are required if the project involves 'A to 3 acre areas of wetlands. <br />Based on Mr. Wopat’s letter. Exhibit F, there is a possibility that this project will be added onto <br />the development project that involved the alteration of similar classified wetlands at 1.76 acres. <br />Review E.xhibit G, Gustafson notes no real concern with the proposal and generally <br />approves the contours shown but recommends that a 10:1 bench from the water line to I below <br />the water line be maintained to encourage emergent vegetation around the pond perimeter. He <br />also notes that due to the proximity of the residences along the west that this will also provide <br />a margin of safety should a child attempt to gain access to this open water area. Gustafson also <br />notes that the existing topsoil should be salvaged for respreading over the disturbed areas and <br />that the areas be restored with a wetland seed mixture such as the Mn/DOT mixture 250. <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1.Safety always is an issue when open water areas are to be created w here none has existed <br />before, especially close to a residential neighborhood. The Engineer has recommended <br />more graduated slopes in hope of providing a certain level of safety. Is this a concern <br />of the"Planning Commission? What other recommendations would you make? Can <br />wetland be moved further east and closer to residence struemre? <br />2.Will house be installed within the stand of trees or to the east or west of the trees? The <br />iices have not been located on the survey. Will there be an attempt to minimize the <br />removal of trees? Applicant should also be advised that there is no required setback <br />from a Type 1 wetland as there would be for a designated wetland with a 26’ setback <br />required. Applicant is afforded greater flexibility in placement of house. <br />Staff w ill not schedule the application before the Council until the Watershed District has <br />provided written confirmation that a permit review will not be necessary and City receives <br />resolve from the Corps of Engineers of the type of permit that will be required to review the <br />installation of the pond, i.e. individual or nationwide permit.