from MCWD re permit application - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

� _ _ Lyle c5man -Tom Cullum.doc _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Pa9e 1 '' _ _ ___ _ _ - — - - - - � I II i ; I' ; i � August 13, 2003 , Tom Cullum 785 Ferndale Road Orono, MN 55391 RE: MCWD permit application 02-433 Dear Mc Cullum, Upon review of the status of your permit application for a Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Permit(MCWD) and Wetland Conservation Act no loss exemption request, MCWD has identified two options to proceed. The second option requires approval by the MCWD Board of Managers. Applications must be complete a minimum of 21 days before the board meeting at which they will be addressed. Permit applications are addressed at the Board of managers meetings on the 2"d and 4'h Thursdays of the month. Options identified by MCWD are as follows: ' 1.) Eliminate any fill beyond a de m_ inimis amount of 400 sq. feet and eliminate the ' proposed expansion of the wetland area. In this case MCWD Rules will not apply if , you are disturbing less then 5,000 square feet or 50 cubic yards of soil. ' 2.) Complete the existing application by submitting the following information: Rule A: • Submit approval by the municipal planning commission or a written statement ' from the responsible municipal official that the project meets municipal approval requirements ' • Submit mailing labels from Hennepin County for all properties 600 feet from ' the subject parcel for pubiic notification of Board meeting at which the ', application will be heard • $10.00 Appiication Fee ' Rule B: Erosion Control ' • Submit a site plan for existing and proposed conditions containing the following information: o Contours sufficient to show drainage on and adjacent to the site o Site property lines ' o Proposed grading and land disturbing activities ' o Locations of buildings on the site o Location and description of proposed erosion prevention and temporary and permanent soil stabilization measures Rule D:Wetland Protection ', • Provide a wetland buffer 25 feet in width (3.39 acre wetland) ', • Demonstrate a no net loss in the quantity, quality, and biological diversity of ' the wetland through an existing and proposed Function and Value ' assessment ' In Accordance with the Wetland Conservation Act: • A Technical Evaluation Panel concluded that the project did not qualify for a no loss exemption under 8420.0220. The TEP's recommendation was that a more comprehensive restoration plan involving the re-establishment of ' � II i _. —_ ____�_.�,�._ _._ __ _ ___- _ ,,.�.____��m�-�. _�_. _,.__.. .� _.J