01-19-1993 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1793 January 14, 1993 Page 3 In a recent inspection of the site with the City Engineer, staff noted draintile dayiighting co the south side of the Feig property (629). It would appear drainage tile has already been installed draining southward to the low area. Staff did not observe drainage tiles coming from the Johnson residence. Staff CooB&ants Please review the City Engineer's report and the Weckman report. Exhibits H and L-l/L-2. Gustafson notes that the pond in not necessary to provide flooding relief from the basement areas of the two residences as there is already a 4' drop from the basement level to the outlet at the southwest end of the property. Review Exhibit O. As already noted, the existing drainage tile drains to the south as well as the swale that has been installed that provides protection to the mound system on the property at 629 North Ferndale. Weckman'8 memo advises that tae portion of the pond that expands outside of the drainage easement cannot be allowed because of the impact on the only suitable area for future septic improvements. He requests that if thu pond is to be installed that pond must only be installed within the protected drainage easement area. Gustafson's memo goes or to discuss the possible benefits of a pond such as the rechar7® the aquifer and a sediment control or trap within the comprehensive drainage system. This specific drainage area is part of an extensive wetland area beginning at the west side of North Ferndale and eventually, as it leaves the subject property, draining from the ditch area into a network of wetlands that finally drains into Lydiard Lake. The proposed open water would function as a seciment trap. As for the claim of a recharge of the aquifer, the limited size of the pond will have a minimal impact on the aquifer. The Army Corps of Engineers has been asked to comment on this application. Joe Yantas reports that because of the size of the proposed pond and the distance from Lake Minnetonka and any other large body of water that the application would fall under the National Permitting Program as pond is less than 10,000 s.f. in area. Mike Panzer of the Wench and Associates, the consultants for the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, advises that such an applxcation would more than likely be approved because of the limited size, the benefits to wxldlife, water quality, location of pond within major drainageway and possible benefits from the recharge of the aquifer.