Laserfiche WebLink
� � <br /> • ORONO COUNCIL NI�ETING HELD OCTOBER 14 ; 1975 Page 4 <br /> • "This conclusion is consistent, with your surface water <br /> management plan in that t�� Crystal Bay area does <br /> � have a surplus of wetlands as far as the quantity of <br /> � runoff is concerned. It should also be recognized <br /> that Kennedy's proposal i� to �i11 approximately 75$ <br /> * os the wetlands. zf this ��rmi� is granted, I would <br /> assume that similar ��rmig�3o� ��r £illing of the <br /> A same portion of t�� l�etlan�s �n ��s neighbor° s <br /> �, property would ha�e t'd �e g��rite�. This would then <br /> result in a serious sHd�t�ge b� pdncing areae Your <br /> � surface water manag���ri� l�� considered not only the <br /> quantity but also tH2 �����t� o� the �aater. The plan <br /> � determined that t��r� �a� on�� 5�$ of thP r�quired <br /> v�etlands in the Cry���1 Bay wa�ershed �.�en requirements <br /> �' for storm water ru�b�f quali�y was cons�.d��redo There- <br /> ` fore, to grant a pe��i� to, �i11 any wetlands in the <br /> Crystal Bay water�hed i� incon�istent ��ith -ch�s plan. <br /> � Befor� any fillirig c�ri ��ke place, it would require <br /> � the �pprb��� of the �innehaha Creek W�tershed District <br /> i7a�agers, t�e Mi�nesota Department of Nwturat Resources, <br /> • and tHe ��rps of Engineers, The proposal is to fill <br /> below the 930 elevation and this propo�al is very much <br /> �� in conflict with the Minnehaha Creek Trd��cer�h�d <br /> i District regulations on wetlands. Th� C�rps of <br /> Engineers permit will require that an e�s�ri�^on:aental <br /> � assessment be prepared and submitted �� pa�t of the <br /> application before it can be consider�d and approved <br /> � uy the Corps. <br /> �►' Summarizing this, we feel that grant:_��� of th� fill <br /> � permit to fill the wetlands would be inconsi�tent with <br /> your zoning and wetlands policye This �aou?� be <br /> • inconsistent with your surface water m?n��ge:r:snt plan <br /> in as much as it would result in a rec�:�c���on of the <br /> �, availability of wetlands in the waterC�e�J �o nrovide <br /> the �reatment you have determined desirabie in your <br /> • surface water management plan, Its �p1A:"0�7�1 �aould <br /> open the way for requests to fill other pa�:-�_ions of <br /> '� the marsh by adjacent property owner� �ahich �•�ould result <br /> � in the final, remaining wetlands being inadequate to <br /> provide the storage capacity consistent w:.th your plans. <br /> ! <br /> We would, however, offer an alternate �olution for your <br /> � considerationo We would recommend t'r.at in erder to <br /> provide P�1r, Kennedy with access to th� lak�shore that <br /> • a variance be granted from your wetlanc?s orainance <br /> � which requires that a 26 ' setback fr�� the edge of the <br /> wetlands be maintained in the natura7. stat�, v�]e would <br /> � propose that the City construct a catch �aaain at the <br /> low point in the cul de sac and provide a pipe from <br /> (j this point to the edge of the wetlands, The Council <br /> could then grant Mr. Kennedy a permi� to fill the <br /> • westerly 15' of his property as long as no fill is <br /> nlaced below elevation 930a The elevution of the top <br /> � of this fill would be approximately the �amQ elevation <br /> � as the frost ridge at the edge of the lakao This <br /> � (Continued) <br />