violation info - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Melanie Curtis From: Catherine Bach [cbach@minnehahacreek.org] Sent: Monday, December 20, 2010 2:55 PM To: Melanie Curtis Cc: Steve Christopher; Luke Schwitzer Subject: 85 Old Crystal Bay Road Photos Attachments: 85 Old Crystal Bay Rd_4-8-10.pdf; 85 Old Crystal Bay Rd 8-25-10.pdf; 85 Old Crystal Bay Rd 11-2-10.pdf; Permit Needed Letter.pdf; Permit Needed 12-6-10.pdf Melanie, Thank you for contacting me about the work at 85 Old Crystal Bay Road in Orono (Scott& Michelle Miller parcel). I have attached three PDF documents containing the photos we have for this property as you requested (4-8-10,8-25-10,and 11-2-10). Back in April,one of our inspectors noticed the stockpiles and stopped and took the 4-8-10 photos. He stopped back at the site again in the end of August and took the 8-25-10 photos. A letter was mailed to the property owners on August 26,2010(Permit Needed Letter.pdf,attached) requesting the submittal of a site plan and the installation of erosion/sediment control. I received a written request from Scott Miller on 10/14/10 for a site meeting to discuss his driveway realignment proposal,and we(Scott and I) met on site on 11/2/10(this is where I took the 11-2-10 photos). During this meeting, I noticed the stockpiles on his property(I actually was not aware of the previous site visits by one of our inspectors until after this site meeting occurred). I indicated to Scott during our meeting the need for stabilization of the stockpiles,and that I was going to look into the details regarding his driveway proposal. After the meeting, I brought up this site to our inspector for Orono,and that is when he told me he had been out there before. I believe there was some correspondence between our inspector and Scott Miller that led our inspector to believe that the stockpiles were only going to be there for a very short period of time,which is why the requirements of the first letter sent out were not fulfilled. That particular inspector no longer works for the District,so unfortunately I cannot confirm exactly what their correspondence was. I left voicemails for Scott on 11/15/10 and 11/29/10 to discuss the stockpile situation,and finally got a call back on 12/6/10. Our discussion was pretty much only about the stockpiles(I told him I still had to look into the wetland delineation and some other things before discussing the driveway realignment). I e-mailed the attached letter(Permit Needed 12-6-10.pdf)that same day regarding the need for a permit application for the stockpiles. Like I said on the phone, I have not yet responded to the Millers about their proposed driveway realignment(relating to WCA and our Waterbody Crossings&Structures Rule), and the permit application for the stockpiles we received last Monday is incomplete. At this point, I will be drafting a letter that addresses the items missing from the permit application as well as their proposed driveway realignment. I will make sure to copy you when this is sent out. I also wanted mention a few other concerns I wanted to discuss with you about this property: 1. The plan set we received on 10/14/10 showing the Miller's rough idea of where they would like their new driveway to be located also happened to include details on the new house that was built within the last few years. This plan shows the wetland fill area for the proposed driveway(now their current driveway)as 2000 square feet. The plan set we have in our permit file for the permit we issued for their new house back in 2005 says 1000 square feet of wetland fill for the proposed driveway,and furthermore, under no circumstances would they be allowed to fill over 1000 square feet of wetland and still qualify for the de minimis exemption under WCA. I asked Scott about this discrepancy during our site meeting,and he didn't know how much wetland was filled for their current driveway...can you tell me how much wetland fill was indicated on the city approved plan for the construction of the new house and current driveway? 1