The URL can be used to link to this page

PL 05/18/1994 - 6933� � �' \ / �' �r / � :�•s PLANNINC� COMMI88ION MLETIN(� WEDNEBDAY, MAY 18, 1994 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC COPY �...,, � - - --- _ - . _,� , ,� __ ._ ti arr � � �#��' _ ... _. ''^'�,� `��.,,.a�•._�.s� -- �� 's ' _ � �� CITY OF FRIDLEY � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4, 1994 �"� � CALL TO ORDER- Vice-Chairperson Kondrick called the May 4, 1994, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Dave Kondrick, Diane Savage, Dean Saba, LeRoy Oquist Members Absent: Dave Newman, Brad Sielaff, Connie Modig others Present: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michelle McPherson, Planning Assistant Faron Turner, 7708 Tyler Street N.E., Spring Lake Park, Minnesota Frank Shimek, 7901 River Terrace Clark Nason, 614 Cheryl Street N.E. M. E. & E. Thompson, 6212 Hillside Road, Edina, Minnesota Tim & Diane Lott, 2149 Sheridan Hills Road, Wayzata, Minnesota Darlene Brady, 641 Buffalo Street N.E. Gordon Hedlund, 1255 Pike Lake Drive, New Brighton, Minnesota James Peterson, 7995 Broad Street APPROVAL.OF APRIL 20, 1994, PLANNING COMMISSION.MINUTES: MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to approve the April 20, 1994, Planning Commission minutes as written. IIPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPTRSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION�CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. l. PUBLIC HEARING: AN ORDINANCE RECODIFYING THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, CHAPTER 205, ENTITLED "ZONING"� BY AMENDING SECTIONS 205.14.1._B, 205.14.1.C, 205.15.1.B, 205.15.1.C, AND RESCINDING AND AMENDING CHAPTER 32, ENTITLED "FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS" MOTION by Ms. Sava.ge, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to open the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPER30N RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:36 �,,,�, P . M . � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 4 1994 PAGE 2 � Ms. Dacy stated this item is a request to amend two zoning districts in the ordinance. The request is to amend the C-2 and C-3 districts, which are commercial, to permit seasonal outdoor food sales. The request is being made because the petitioner, William Turner and his son, Faron Turner, operate a mini-doughnut machine. They were selling mini-doughnuts inside the Wal-Mart Store during the holiday season last year. The mechanical code requires this type of equipment to have a venting system to have the exhaust leave the area of the machine and out of the building. Wal-Mart was not willing to provide the venting system. The alternative was to locate the mini-doughnut machine outside the building. The zoning code however does not permit the outdoor sales of food items. Mr. Turner subsequently spoke at a City Council meeting during the Open Forum to request the City Council to consider amending the ordinance. The City Council directed staff to develop options for their review which staff did and brought back to the City Council. The City Council decided they would be able to support an amendment that would permit�outdoor food sales, both on a temporary and long term basis, using different tools in the zoning code and the licensing chapter. The amendment to the zoning ordinance includes three different types of sales Of food items, as follows: A. Daily sal.es. Sales which occur each day for ten or more consecutive days. � B. Weekly sales. Sales which occur for a minimum of one and a maximum of three consecutive days each week for two or more consecutive weeks during the year. C. Special event sales. Sales which occur for a minimum of one and a maximum of ten consecutive days, and no more than two times per year. The weekly sales and special event sales would be a permitted accessory use and would require a license. The petitioner would come in, file an application for a license, and this would be handled by staff. For daily sales, staff suggest there be a special use permit in the C-2 and C-3 districts. Using this as a framework, staff developed seven standards with which all of the sales would have to comply: 1. The sale area shall not exceed ten feet by 20 feet (200 square feet of area). 2. The sale area shall be located within 20 feet of the major entrance of the principle building. 3. The sale area shall not be located within the 20 foot parking setback or in the public right-of-way. � � � �- PLANNING COMMISSTON MEETING. MAY 4 1994 PAGE 3 4. The sale area shall not interfere with parking or traffic patterns. 5. The pedestrian waiting area shall be clearly defined, signed, and shall be protected and separated from vehicular traffic. 6. Sale equipment shall meet all appliqable building, fire, and electrical codes. 7. A license shall be obtained in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 32 of the Fridley City Code prior to conducting sale activities. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the proposed ordinance amendment. Ms. Dacy stated, as a related item, Chapter 32, the Food Establishment Code which would require the license, is currently being reviewed by the Clerk's Office. Because this is not�part of the zoning code, it will not be brought before the Planning Commission. Also, she was contacted by a local restaurant owner wondering if the outdoor eating area at his establishment might be restricted by this ordinance. In order to clarify for the record, this is not the case. This amendment is to address te�porary food sales, such as the mini doughnut operation, which is not a continuous principal use of the property. Mr. Saba asked if staff had considered tieing these types of sales to the number of square feet of space so they are not lined up along the wall. Is there a maximum number of food vendors allowed? Ms. Dacy stated this was not discussed but they may want to restrict the number of sales occurring on any one property at any one time. This could be a standard. Mr..Oquist stated the intent is not to restrict outdoor use at restaurants, but this could restrict that. There should be wording in the standard that does not restrict. Ms. Dacy stated, in the definition of sales, they can clarify what the term means and perhaps define by excluding restaurants with outdoor eating areas. Mr. Oquist stated, in the �irst standard, the sale area is not to exceed 10 feet by 20 feet (200 square feet). He asked if they wanted to restrict this to 200 square feet or 10 feet by 20 feet. Ms. Dacy stated she would recommend stating 200 square feet and �,,,� not provide dimensions. � � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. MAY 4 1994 PAGE 4 Ms. Savage asked if restaurants can have outdoor tables without a special use permit. Ms. Dacy stated this was correct. There are no specific guidelines in the code about that. Outdoor seating areas are typically separated from a sidewalk or street and customers have to get back into the main building to pay. The food is being sold and eaten on the premises. The City is trying to address food sales purchased and not eaten in the immediate area. Mr. Faron Turner thanked staff and the Commission for their time and effort. He and his father have gotten a good response from the public as far as what they do at Wal-Mart. People are coming and like to find them there. It is a novelty that the public� enjoys and Wal-Mart enjoys, and they would like to continue. He understands the proposed amendments, but he does not know where it will end up. As far as the down draft system used to vent the operation in the store, when they purchased the equipment, they we.re told it was approved equipment but later learned.it was not approved within the City. They would not have used it if they had known. He met with Ms. Dacy at the site, and he hopes they can continue their operation. Ms. Darlene Brady stated she had a thought about the outdoor seati:ng areas at restaurant. These areas do not have food prepared there. Food is prepared inside and served outdoors. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Savage, to close the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:52 P.M. Mr. Saba stated he would like to see included in the amendment wording that addresses the number of food sales vendors allowed in any one area to avoid a carnival-like appearance and change the area to read 200 square feet. Mr. Oquist stated there should also be clarification of food preparation or food sales and to whom it applies. Mr. Kondrick asked if Ms. Dacy would like to make the changes and come back or if she would like a recommendation. Ms. Dacy stated she would like to have a recommendation if the Commission is comfortable in doing so without actually seeing the changes. r"� MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Savage, to recommend to the City Council approval of an ordinance recodifying the Fridley ^ City Code, Chapter 205, entitled "Zoning" by amending Sections �. PLANNING_COMMISSION MEETING. MAY 4 1994 PAGE 5 '� 205.4.1.B, 205.14.1.C, 205.15.1.B, 205.15.1.C, and rescinding and amending Chapter 32, entitled "Food Establishments"; that the standard regarding the sale area be amended to read, "Sale area shall not exceed 200 square feet of area"; that there be included a limit to the number of sellers allowed at a site; and that there be clarification of food preparation and food sales. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL oOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIBD DNANIMOIISLY. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. SP #94-06. BY WILLIAM TURNER: � Per proposed Section 205.14.01..C.(18) of the Fridley City Code, to allow seasonal daily outdoor sales of food (mini doughnuts) on Lot 1, Block 1, Wal-Mart in Fridley, the same being 8450 University Avenue N.E. (Wal-Mart Store) MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. �aba, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:56 P.M. ''� Ms. Dacy stated the parcel is located at the Wa1-Mart Store _ located at the corner of 85th Avenue�and University. The property is zoned C-2, Commercial. The Springbrook Apartments are on the west side of the property and are zoned R-3, Multiple Family, and the vacant property now under construction is zoned C-2, Commercial. Ms. Dacy stated the petitioner is requesting a special use permit for doughnut sales just east of the front door within the 20 feet distance required by the zoning ordinance just discussed. The vendor will be located on the sidewalk in front of the store. The sidewalk is about 10 feet deep. The trailer is 7 feet by 10 feet so the trailer will be located lengthwise along the wall of the building. At this point, the area is striped for pedestrian traffic and there are bollards in front of the store's main entrance. Ms. Dacy stated the petitioner stated during the site visit, because.they prepare the doughnuts in the bags in advance, they have not generally had a line and there is not an overcrowded condition. Staff have reviewed the request based on the standards developed in the zoning ordinance and recommend the Planning Commission recommend approval of the special use permit subject to the following stipulations: 1. Daily sales of mini doughnuts shall begin on May 1 and end on October 1 of each year. � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4. 1994 PAGE 6 2. The petitioner shall submit documentation to the Fire Marshall regarding the fire extinguishing system for the deep fat fryer. 3. The petitioner shall obtain a license as required in Chapter 32 of the City Code and comply with the seven standards of the proposed ordinance amendment. 4. This special use permit is for the daily sales of mini- doughnuts only; additional sales shall obtain the appropriate licenses or special use permits as governed by the proposed ordinance amendment. Extensions to the sale period shaTl be approved by the City Council. Mr. Oquist stated the petitioner indicated that Wal-Mart was in favor of this business. Are they in favor of this being outside? Mr. Turner stated they were outside �or a short time before going inside. Wal-Mart likes their operation, and people seem to like it and ask when they will.be back. Mr. Kondrick stated the City received a letter from the Wal-Mart store manager indicating he and the customers have been happy with the facility and the food. � Mr. Saba stated he has a concern that the vendor is selling food in disposable bags and the customer throws the bag away�. He would not like to see these disposable bags thrown away in the parking lot and subsequently littering the Springbrook Nature Center. Mr. Turner stated they pick up the bags when they see them. They fill the bag up all the way to the top, and customers end up taking them home. This has not been an issue. He can place a garbage can outside. The units are spotless all the time and are approved by the Health Department. They follow the codes and try to recycle as much as they can. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to close the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, AI,L VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON RQNDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:02 P.M. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded.by Ms. Savage, to recommend to the City Council approval of Special Use Permit, SP #94-06, by William Turner, to allow seasonal daily, outdoor sales of food (mini-doughnuts) on Lot l, Block 1, Wal-Mart in Fridley, with the following stipulations: �"1 /"'� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4, 1994 PAGE 7 � � � � l. Daily sales of mini doughnuts shall begin on May 1 and end on October 1 of each year. 2. The petitioner shall submit documentation to the Fire Marshall regarding the fire extinguishing system for the deep fat fryer. 3. The petitioner shall obtain a license as required in Chapter 32 of the City Code and comply with the seven standards of the proposed ordinance amendment. 4. This special use permit is for the daily sales of mini- doughnuts only; additional sales shall obtain the appropriate licenses or special use permits as governed by the proposed ordinance amendment. Extensions to the sale period shall be approved by the City Council. IIPON A VOICE V�TE, ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERBON KONDRICR DECLAR�D THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. Mr. Turner stated the first stipulation states the dates of operation fr•om May 1 to October 1. Is it possible for him to start working anytime soon? Ms. Dacy stated the petitioner is asking to start the operation prior to City Council approval which will not be until June 20. She suggested he write a letter which she will pass on to the City Council. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #94-05, BY GORDON HEDLUND: Per Section 205.24.4.D and 205.24.5.A of the Fridley City Code, to allow construction in the CRP-2 District (Flood Fringe) on Lots 13, 14, 15, and 16, Block V, Riverview Heights, generally located on the north side of Dover Street west of Broad Avenue. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Saba, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� oICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HLARING OPEN AT 8s05 P.M. Ms. MCPherson stated the Planning Commission has before them requests for three separate lots in the Riverview neighborhood. As each lot is unique and the issues different for each parcel, the requests will be presented individually. Ms. McPherson stated the first request for Special Use Permit, SP #94-05, is for 665 Dover Street. This property is located approximately 160 feet east of Riverview Terrace on the north PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4. 1994 PAGE 8 �, side of Dover. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family, and is vacant. The property meets the minimum lot area requirement of 9,000 square feet as it has a lot area of 10,978 square feet. The code requires a minimum lot width of 75 feet. The subject parcel has a lot width of 99.5 feet. The petitioner does not have a buyer for this lot; however, the surveyor working with the petitioner indicated the proper setback requirements for the lot on the site survey and has identified a house pad which meets the setback requirements. There is a 30 foot by 40 foot dwelling unit proposed for this lot which meets the setback requirements. Ms. McPherson stated the special use permit request is to allow construction of a dwelling unit in the flood fringe area. A portion of the Riverview Heights neighborhood is in the flood fringe area and is regulated by local ordinance and Federal regulations to require construction to meet certain flood avoidance regulations. The regulations require the first floor elevation of habitable living space be one foot above the 100- year flood level. On this parcel, that elevation is 823.1 feet above sea level. The petitioner is proposing a first floor elevation of 824.1 feet. In order to insure that.the construction meets the minimum flood elevation requirements, the ordinance requires the petitioner to submit an elevation certificate submitted by a registered surveyor verifying that the � first floor elevation is at the proper elevation. This needs to /� be done prior to the foundation being capped and construction continuing on the dwelling unit. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner has proposed a garage elevation of 822.1 feet. The garage is considered an accessory use, and accessory uses are permitted below the 100-year flood elevation if they meet certain standards: 1) They are not for human habitation; 2) They have low flood damage potential; and 3) Structures are firmly anchored. The ordinance also requires that the portion of the accessory structure that is below the 100-year flood level needs to be flood�proofed in accordance with current Federal and State regulations. Ms. McPherson stated the ordinance also requires the fill needed to bring the first floor elevation up to the required minimum extend a minimum of 15 feet around the dwelling unit.� The petitioner has proposed the required 15 feet of fill. As a result of the fill to be placed on the lot, the drainage patterns on the subject parcel will change. Currently, water flows from the rear to the front of the parcel, east along the curb line of Dover Street to a catch basin, and then through a pipe and westerly to the river. As a r.esult of the fill being piaced on the site, the water would then flow around the fill being placed or towards the east and west property lines and then south to the street. In order to direct this water from flowing to adjacent properties, well defined drainage swales will need to be constructed to direct the water in the proper direction. Staff ,� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. MAY 4 1994 PAGE 9 �Y is recommending that a grading and drainage plan stamped and signed by a registered civil engineer be submitted by the petitioner prior to any action being taken on the request by the Planning Commission or City Council. The surveyor has indicated general drainage on the site plans; however, there are no spot elevations or slope percents with which staff can verify the drainage plan as submitted can function as it should. Ms..McPherson stated the petitioner would also need to submit an erosion control plan, which is required by Chapter 208 of the City code. In the past for similar requests, the City has requested the petitioner execute and record a hold harmless agreement to release the City from any liability should damage occur due to flooding as the result of the City's approval of the special use permit. Ms. McPherson stated there are some miscellaneous.requirements associated with this request. There are-a number of mature trees located along the west, north and east lot lines, These mature� trees are an asset to the parcel and attempts should be made by the petitioner to preserve as many of these trees as is practical. � � The subj.ect parcel is composed of four 25-foot lots which have been assigned individual Property Identification Numbers.(PIN) with a tax statement being issued for each number. The Assessor has requested the petitioner combine these lots into one PIN so the new property owner would receive one tax statement. The petitioner has complied with the requirements of the O1 district regulations. However, staff is still concerned that the stormwater runoff be properly addressed by the petitioner. Ms. McPherson stated staff recommends the Planning Commission conduct the public hearing in order to receive testimony fr.om.the adjacent property owners but table its decision until the petitioner has submitted the required grading and drainage plan from a registered civil engineer. If the Commission should choose to act on the request, staff recommends.the following stipulations: 1. The petitioner shall submit an elevation certificate as part of a verifying survey prior to the foundation being capped, which shall verify that the minimum first floor elevatian is 824.1. 2. The petitioner shall flood-proof the garage in accordance with current federal and state flood-proofing requirements to a minimum of the 100-year flood elevation. � 0 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4. 1994 PAGE 10 3. The fill placed on the property shall extend a minimum of 15 feet from the proposed dwelling unit. 4. A grading and drainage plan and an erosion control plan shall be designed, signed, and stamped by a registered civil engineer showing well-defined drainage swales along the north, west, and easterly lot lines. The drainage plan shall indicate spot elevations and percent slopes for the drainage swales. These plans shall be submitted for staff review prior to City Council review of the special use permit. 5. Petitioner shall execute and record against the proper�y a hold harnaless agreement releasing the City from liability if damage occurs as the result of flooding. 6. The grading and drainage plan shall indicate the number of trees to be preserved. 7. The petitioner shall sign a Combination Farm, combining the property into one tax statement prior to building permit issuance. Mr. Hedlund stated he is in the construction business and he could build the houses and sell them. He would�prefer to sell the lots to someone in the c.onstruction business or sell to a person who wanted a home in the area. He would then have a specific plan. One of the requirements that staff suggest is to have an engineer to do all this work, but he thought the surveyor was qualified to do this type of thing. For the sake of simplicity, he thought it would be adequate to have the information for drainage taken care of by the surveyor. Mr. Kondrick asked staff if they felt a surveyor could provide this plan or does this need to be done by an engineer. Ms. Dacy stated, while the surveyor has provided information on the general direction of the flow, staff's concern is that a registered engineer could actually do calculations of.the runoff, run through the typical 100-year storm event calculations from typical studies, and from that be able to design with a good degree of accuracy exactly how deep the swales should be on the north, west and east lot lines and how wide the swales should be; and the registered engineer can then submit a plan that says the lot can handle the runoff from the house on its own. � Mr. Oquist asked how can this be done without the footprint of the house. Ms. Dacy stated this can be done knowing�the amount of impervious surface. An engineer can run through the calculations to determine the amount of runoff that would occur, combine that ^� with the runoff from the grades and give staff a dimension of how N �, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 4. 1994 PAGE 11 � wide the swales should be and at what slope. In this particular lot, there appears to be enough change in grade to direct the water to the street. Staff wants to know with some degree of accuracy, and a registered engineer can do that, that the water can be handled. Mr. Oquist stated part of the plan from them may be the stipulation that says what could happen with a house of a particular size. Mr. Kondrick asked, if the footprint were put the other way, is that possible? If so, would it not hamper the flow of water from the south? Ms. Dacy stated, in answer to both questions, yes, and doing so would affect the drainage. The petitioner wants�approval from the City so he can sell the lot. Staff wants an approved drainage plan based on a reasonable site plan. Mr.. Kondrick stated this is suitable for a prospective buyer and also for the neighbors so they know the water can be handle.d. Ms. Dacy stated without an engineer submitting a plan that shows how deep this swale should be, may be leaving too much.discretion ^, up to the builder and/or the City to interpret what was the _ Council's intent. Staff. is trying to reasonably assure the buyer, adjacent homeowners, and the City that the drainage can be handled. Mr. Hedlund stated the house will be very close to the stated size and shape. One of the things that could be done to make the base smaller is to construct a two-foot overhang in the front and in the back. In speaking of the engineers, he is thinking of the cost of an engineer. When they have a document such as presented, a surveyor will know what he is up against. If he does not feel qualified, they would not do it. But, rather than going to an engineer and since he is working with a qualified surveyor, he would recommend saving the cost of an engineer. There is a limit to how high the costs should be on this. Ms. Savage asked to clarify the original reason for the request and if this was because the property is in the flood fringe and so no dwelling can be built without the special use permit. Ms. McPherson stated this was correct. Even an accessory structure must have a special use permit.. Mr. Frank Shimek stated he is concerned about the condition of the Coon Rapids dam. The dam is in bad shape and Anoka County is � not doing anything about it. He felt it dangerous to build a house in that area until that structure is repaired or removed. --- If the dam should break, all homes in that area will be flooded. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4 1994 PAGE 12 Ms. Darlene Brady referred to the special use permit and asked if this required an engineer. Mr. Kondrick stated this is not always the case, but in this situation with changing the elevation due to the fill, the City wants to make sure the run off will be contained on the property. Ms. Brady asked whose decision it is to require or not require an engineer. Mr. Saba stated the Commission's recommendation goes to the City Council who make the final decision. Ms. Brady stated she would prefer to have an engineer. Regarding building in general in that area, she was happy to see the City requires a�old harmless agreement. With flooding to the south last year and the government not in support of dikes, which is located there, she wonders about the advisability of new construction in that area which would compound any problems that. might come up. The dike was not built like those that gave out last. year. It was not constructed in the same manner, but rather on an emergency basis, which may mean it was not as well constructed which increases the possibility of something happening. The r.iver is high now as well as the water in the creek. If it rains, she does not know what will hap�en. She wonders if it is advisable to build new homes in that area. , Ms. Brady stated another concern is the sewer system in that area. She has lived in that area about eight years and has had the city sewer back up into her home five times. She wonders what the effect of additional homes will be on the sewer system. The sewage goes through a pumping station and is pumped up the hill. Ms. Brady stated a year or two ago another house was built in that area. She feels the house is much too big for the lot and for the neighborhood. It does not fit into the type of homes in that neighborhood. A smaller lot should have a smaller home. She is also concerned about the water run off. Mr. James Peterson stated the elevation of the foundation, as he reads the drawing, would be 8 feet above the street level. He is concerned about how high the houses are from street level on the other sides of this lot, particularly if building a two story home or if the house has a steeply pitched roof. How high would this be in relation to the other houses in that area? Ms. Dacy stated the drawing shows an elevation of 819 feet.at the curb and the top of the foundation is at 824.1�feet. The elevation along the east and west lot lines is 820 feet. Mr. Peterson asked if this home would be much taller. � � ;^� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. MAY 4. 1994 PAGE 13 Ms. Dacy stated she had only ground elevations, but this house would be somewhat higher. Mr. Peterson stated the one suggestion he would make would be that the City limit the structure to a one-story home and a 5-12 pitch roof to minimize the impact to the neighborhood. In general, he is.pleased to see new homes coming in. The new homes are larger than the older homes in that area. Construction has changed and because it does not conform to the 600 to 800 square foot homes that are there, one should not put it ir► disfavor. A 30 foot by 40 foot house means 1200 square feet. What is the minimum number of square feet now required by the code? Ms. McPherson stated the minimum first floor dwelling unit size is 1020 square feet. Mr. Peterson stated a garage was mentioned but he does not see if on the plan. Is the garage attached to the front? Ms. McPherson stated the front portion would be the garage. Mr. Hedlund stated the 30 foot x 40 foot dimension is for both the house and the garage. The structure would be a split level with an overhang to provide additional square feet with a smaller �'",, foundation. He does not have a specific plan now but this would _ be a respectable house. � �, Mr. Peterson stated he thinks a two-story will give too much height compared to the 1 1/2 story homes in that area. Ms. Diane Lott asked if a home with two-foot overhangs would still meet the setback requirements. Mr. Oquist stated there is sufficient room to have the two-foot overhangs and still meet the minimum setback requirements. Mr. Tim Lott stated, when reading about the tile around the house, he was not sure whether it would work or not or it has not been proven this would drain properly. Is this correct? Ms. McPherson stated these are called drainage swales which is� surface drainage system for the area around what is being filled. Staff has stated, in general, that the surveyor has indicated general drainage patterns but there are no spot elevations and it does not indicate the water flows to a point that is lower nor does it give a percentage of slope from the bottom of that swale. That is why staff is asking that an engineer design the drainage swales so that staff can tell the builder how deep the swales need to be and at what slope so that it works. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4 1994 PAGE 14 Mr. Lott stated that it seems as if no matter what is built on the property now will be higher than any other house in that area because of the changes in the building requirements. What you � have now is a house on top of a mound. He cannot see how this can prevent drainage which is already a problem in that area. He cannot see how this will work. Ms. Brady stated the storm water runs down the street. Ms. McPherson stated staff acknowledges that this dwelling needs to be built at a higher elevation as a result of the adoption of the ordinances in 1977, but there is a way by the grading of the property that water can be diverted properly to where it is supposed to go and may even help drain other properties. Mr. Lott asked if the water is to drain out to the street. He did. not see how this would help the neighhors who have problems with water now. Right now., the water is going into the ground. With a dwelling there, it is not only impacting the area but .it seems it would create further problems by draining the water to the street. Ms. Dacy stated, by requiring swales along the perimeter, it helps to channel the run off from the roof and the surrounding properties as well. Some of these lots are too flat so water n cannot run off. By creating a swale, or as in another lot to be reviewed, it may be necessary to.put in a catch basin and pipe improvement, in order to catch the run off and prevent ponding: from backing up onto another property. While it is not a perfect system, every lot has to handle its own run off and that is the basis for staff's suggestion that a detailed plan be provided by an engineer. Ms. Brady asked if they were saying there would not be any more water going in the street after a house is built. Ms. Dacy stated no, but by adding additional impervious surface there is going to be more run off than a vacant property. That is the reason for a drainage plan and to know how deep the swales will be to get the water to the street. The swales can act also act to retain the water. Ms. Brady stated, when it rains heavy, the water pools in her yard and it seems this would be adding to that. Mr. Hedlund stated this is a general drainage plan, and it would work. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Ms. Savage, to close the public hearing. ,� 0 %^� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 4 1994 PAGE 15 IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED.AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:50 P.M. Mr. Saba stated he would definitely insist on an engineer's 'opinion on the drainage. Ms. Savage stated she would agree and would recommend tabling.a decision until that has been submitted. Mr. Oquist agreed to both the engineering plan and tabling. Mr. Saba stated he would also like to have some answers on the impact to the sewer system and how the drainage affects what is already in the street. Many good questions were brought up and they need to be answered. � MOTION by Ms. Savage, seconded by Mr. Saba, to table consideration of Special Use Permit, SP #94-05, to allow construction in the CRP-2 District (Flood Fringe) on Lots 13, 14, 15, and T6, Block V, Riverview Heights, until submission of a drainage and erosion control plan designed, signed, and stamped by a.registered civil engineer; and until such time staff provide additional information on the storm sewer and sanitary sewer ^ systems. Mr.. Oquist asked, through the special use permit, can the height of properties be restricted? Ms. Dacy stated she would like to confirm this with the city attorney. OPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. � 4. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. SP #94-03, BY GORDON HEDLUND: Per Section 205.24.4.D and 205.24.5.A of the Fridley City Code, to allow construction�in the CRP-2 District (Flood Fringe) on Lots 12 and 13, Block Y, Riverview Heights, generally located on the south side of Buffalo Street east of Riverview Terrace. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Saba, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERBON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:54 P.M. �'' Ms. McPherson stated this request is for the property addressed � as 7915 Riverview Terrace N.E. The property is located at the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4, 1994 PAGE 16 � intersection of Buffalo Street and Riverview Terrace. The property is vacant and has been a lot of record since prior to 1955. It was platted in the late 1800's. For lots of record platted prior to 1955, the zoning code.does have an exception to the 9,000 square foot minimum lot area. This exception allows a lot area of 7,500 square feet. The parcel exceeds that minimum having a lot area of 7,982.4 square feet. The subject parcel has a width of 60 feet, which exceeds the minimum lot area for this special exception for a lot width of 50 feet. The request is for a special use permit to allow construction of a dwelling in a flood fringe area. For this lot, the 100-year flood elevation is 822.9. feet above sea level. The minimum first floor elevation would be 823.9 feet. The petitioner is proposing a first floor elevation of 824 feet. A verifying elevation certificate would be required to be submitted by the petitioner. The petitioner is proposing that the garage be lower than the minimum flood elevation or 822 feet. The garage would be required to be flood proofed in accordance with.curre�t Federal and State regulations. Ms. McPherson stated there is 15 feet of fill which is.required to extend outward from the dwelling unit. In this request, since the lot is a narrow lot, a retaining wall is needed along the south to retain the fill needed to meet the minimum elevation requirement. This is because there is not enough distance to tie the elevations back in a natural pattern. The natural drainage patterns will be changed by t�ie placement of fill on the property. Based on the submitted grading plan,.sta�f has determined that water flows from west to east across the subject parcel and into Buffalo Street, where it flows to a catch basin� located at the very east end of Buffalo Street. The water then flows into Springbrook Creek and then to the Mississippi River. It appears there is a low area along the south property line where water would flow naturally in its undeveloped s�ate into the property to the south. once the fill is placed on the lot, water would then be directed to the north and east lot lines. Staff is requesting well defined drainage swales be constructed to direct water off the property and away from other parcels. Staff is especially concerned about the south and east lot lines to prevent water from draining onto the properties to the east and south. Staff is recommending a grading and drainage place be submitted by a registered civil engineer to insure that the slopes are accurate and that the drainage plan will work as it is designed. The petitioner will need to submit an erosion control plan. /'1 Staff recommend the retaining wall be designed by a registered ,� structural engineer to insure the retaining wall will work. �--� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4. 1994 PAGE 17 Ms. McPherson stated staff requires a hold harmless agreement to release the City from any liability as a result of the issuance of the special use permit. For this particular parcel, the Engineering Department is requesting that a 10-foot flood control, street, utility and drainage easement be granted to the City along the westerly property line. In 1969, the City condemned a similar easement of 7 feet adjacent to the property line for the construction of Riverview Terrace. The Engineering Department has been working with the Minnesota State Aid program to define Riverview Terrace as a neighborhood collector and to reconstruct Riverview Terrace in order to meet Minnesota State Aid guidelines and to improve.. the road. The road would be widened and the height of the road increased to provide additional flood control measures for the neighborhood. The easement is requested to provide additional right-of-way for the road reconstruction. The right-of-way can be obtained through a dedication or through the granting of an easement. Ms. McPherson stated there are also miscellaneous requests. There are a number of trees on the property, and staff are requesting the grading and drainage plan indicate those trees which are to be preserved. �"� The parcel is composed of two lots which have two PIN's and, therefore, two tax statements. The Assessor has requested the petitioner combine these lots into one PIN which would mean tMe property owner would receive one tax statement. Ms. McPherson stated staff recommends the Planning Coiamission conduct the public hearing to receive testimony from the adjacent property owners and the neighborhood,. but table the request until stamped and signed drawings for the drainage from a civil engineer have been submitted. If the Commission chooses to recommend approval, staff recommends the following stipulations: l. The petitioner shall submit an elevation certificate in addition to a verifying survey prior to the foundation being capped, which shall verify that the minimum first floor elevation is 824. 2. The petitioner sha11 flood-proof the garage in accordance with current Federal and State flood-proofing requirements to a minimum of the 100-year flood elevation. 3. The fill placed on the property shall extend a minimum of 15 feet from the proposed dwelling unit. 4. The petitioner shall submit retaining wall plans tha.t have �� been signed by a structural engineer. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. MAY 4. 1994 PAGE 18 5. The petitioner shall execute and record against the property a hold harmless agreement releasing the City from liability if damage occurs as a result of flooding. 6. The petitioner shall grant a 10-foot flood control, street, utility, and drainage easement along the west lot line. 7. A grading and drainage plan and an erosion control plan shall be designed, signed, and stamped by a registered civil engineer showing well-defined drainage swales along the north, west, and easterly lot lines. The drainage plan shall indicate spot elevations and percent slopes for the drainage swales. These plans shall �e submitted for staff review prior to City Council review of the special use permit. 8. The grading and drainage plan shall indicate the nuniber of trees to be preserved. 9. The petitioner shall sign a Combination Form, combining the property into one tax statement prior to building permit issuance. Mr. Kondrick asked for a comparison of the elevation of the property and the proposed structure to the other properties. Ms. McPherson stated the average elevation of the subject . property from east to west along Riverview Terraee is 819 feet. In the middle of the property, the elevation is approximately 818 feet. Along the east, the elevation is 819 feet. The first floor elevation is proposed to be at 824 feet so there is approximately a 5-foot difference from the dwelling unit to the elevation to the south. At the corner of Buffalo and Riverview Terrace, the elevation appears to be 822 feet. The elevations are lower going east to 818.3 at the east corner of Buffalo. The garage level is proposed to be at 822 feet which is about 4 feet above street level. Mr. Kondrick asked if the proposed structure is 24 feet x 40 feet. Ms. McPherson stated this is the proposed pad which meets the setback requirements. Mr. Saba asked if there were the same concerns here about the storm sewer and sanitary sewers. �, . � Ms. McPherson stated, according.to the Engineering Department, there is no storm sewer under Buffalo Street. All run off in on surface on Buffalo Street. The first catch basin is at the end of Buffalo. As far as staff can tell, the water then enters S rin brook Creek and then to the Mississi '� P g ppi River. � � ^; ;� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4 1994 PAGE 19 Mr. Hedlund stated, with the exception of the retaining wall, the drainage and erosion could be handled by a surveyor. Ms. Brady stated Buffalo Street, coming from Riverview Terrace, has quite a sl�ope to it, and residents are getting water from Riverview Terrace. When it rains heavily, it starts pooling in front of her house near the garage. The garage is very close to the street. If there is water coming off the southeast corner, she feels her property would be flooded. She lives across the street from the vacant property. The street is narrow, and she will have trouble getting_in and out of her garage if someone parks on the street. She does not think Buffalo can handle any more water and the water has to go to the other end of the street to go down the drain. Riverview Terrace is higher than this lot. If Riverview Terrace is to be improved, will this make the lot smaller? Ms. McPherson stated the City is requesting an easement be granted which would be used for side slopes for the road. The road would not be expanded into the lot. If the road is to be expanded, it would be expanded toward the river side. The proposal is to increase the height of the road, perhaps by.two feet, in order to use it as a flood control structure. The. easement being requested is to tie the side slopes of the road back into the adjacent property. Ms. Brady asked if there wnuld be more water going back onto the property from the Riverview Terrace road improvement project. Ms. Dacy stated they did not have detailed construction plans of the street as of yet. They do know there will be concrete curb and gutter so some of the run off will not be directed onto this property. There will still be the slope however into Buffalo Street. Ms. Brady stated there is the sewer problem. This is a low area. Every time the city sewer backs up, it backs up into their homes. She feels this will add to the problem. She asked what side would be considered the front of the house. Ms. McPherson stated the code defines the front as the shortest of the two street frontages on a corner lot so the front is defined as Riverview Terrace. Ms. Brady stated her house is fairly close to the street. This house is close to the street and this is a narrow street. If a large house is built on this lot, she did not think this would be appropriate for the location. She would prefer no one build on the property, but if they do, she would prefer a low profile house. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4. 1994 PAGE 20 ,� Ms. Brady asked how the square footage was figured. She was tald the lot was 60 feet x 146 feet, but from the shape this does not appear to be accurate. � Ms. McPherson stated the area was calculated by the surveyor. The lot is a trapezoid so there is a mathematical formula for calculating the area. Ms. Brady stated she believed there was a question about the survey and asked, when the property was surveyed, did they take into consideration that the street has moved since putting in th� dike. Ms. McPherson stated that this has been taken into consideration. Ms. Brady.stated she is conc�rned about getting in and out of her garage. She is concerned about the water coming off this � property. It will also affect other properties as well. She asked if the proposed garage is a two-car garage and the type of home to be built. Ms. McPherson stated yes, the code requires a minimum two-car garage. . Mr. Hedlund stated the house would be a split entry design. � Ms. Brady stated she has the same concerns with this property as with the previous property. Mr. Kondrick stated there is concern about the water run off and how this will be managed as it relates to the property to the adjoining properties. As the water leaves the subject property, then what obligation have do we have? Ms. Dacy stated the City tries to, with any street improvement or any drainage improvement, control drainage with the public right- of-way. It is typically held by state law and local code that every lot should handle its own water and should not adversely affect other properties. Staff is trying to make sure that the run off from the abutting properties drains down to the street and to the catch basin. What staff is hearing.from the testimony is that the water does pond from time to time and Ms. Brady's concern is that the elevations in the right-of-way are such that the water ends up in her front yard. Staff will need to evaluate that. Mr. Oquist stated this is proposed and the plan could change. The City does not know exactly where the driveway will be at this point. This must be monitored. �. � � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4, 1994 PAGE 2.1 Ms. Brady stated the retaining wall appears to run the.length of the property an the south side. What happens to the water run off in that area? Ms. McPherson stated the retaining wall does not go all the way to the end of the lot. The surveyor has acknowledged that water from the adjacent property would need to flo�a across this particular parcel to leave the area due to the current grades. The surveyor is tieing back into the natural contours by not extending the retaining wall all the way to the lot line. Ms. Brady stated, to her knowledge, the water travels south. If the ground is built up more, there wili be more water coming down there. Ms. McPherson stated this is where the drainage swale would need to handle the water. The natural slope of the lot provides some natural drainage. Ms. Brady stated she would prefer to have an engineer involved rather than a surveyor. The water run off is a-problem in that area, and the sewer system is a big problem in that area also. Mr, M. E. Thompson stated he thinks this makes no sense. ^ Neighboring properties have water on their property much of the year. He thinks this will make the problem worse. Mr. Tim Lott stated his concerns are the drainage swales on the east side. In looking at the €low, there are trees along that border and there is a stipulation about the preservation of trees. There are trees along the border and trees where the house is planned also. When looking at the terrain of`the area, he sees a house there, additional run off and the trees gone. The house elevation is at least four feet higher than the street. The proposed driveway is on a narrow street. He cannot see a reason for having a house there, let along trying to place it on a lot that is very small.. Sewer back up is already a problem and he sees more potential problems with the raising of the road. The problem he has is that the City is looking at putting in houses that are dramatically higher. He sees an impact to the people living there. It looks like a bad situation for the size of the house and the effect on the people who live around it. Mr. Peterson stated this is the entrance to the area. This is a beautifully wooded area and the builder faces a dilemma. Thi� area could be a beautifully done development. He is s.ure the builder is using his skills and.t�lents to cope with the � situation. Every day he passes the property. It is a charming area and a very rural looking area. The present use of the property provides a park-like atmosphere. The City has a !"'\ choice. The present use can continue or something can be built there that will add character and value to the neighborhood. 0 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 4 1994 PAGE 22 �, This is an area where the HRA could get involved to develop that - peninsula and increase the value of each of the homes by putting four to six homes in that area, and by doing so comprehensively would eliminate the problems generated by piece meal growth. l�s. Brady fe�t ti�e bt�ile�e� �as €�g�t��g too ma�y raatural elements with this lot. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Savage, to close the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9532 P.M. Mr. Saba stated, once again, there is a critical question about the drainage that must be answered. The sanitary sewer question is another question that must also be addressed regardless of what happens to this property or any other property. He felt a nice home could be built on the.property, but the drainage question must be answered. Mr. Oquist agreed. The drainage needs to be addressed. This lot may have more of a problem with the drainage with the proposed driveway and its slope which could put a lot of water into the ^ street. Mr. Kondrick stated, if the water concerns can be addressed, he would agree. Mr. Oquist stated another point was made regarding comprehensive planning in the area and making sure the homes built are consistent with the rest of the homes. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Saba, to table consideration of Special Use Permit, SP #94-03, to allow construction in the CRP-2 District (Flood Fringe) on Lots 12 and 13, Block Y, Riverview Heights, until submission of a drainage and erosion control plan designed, signed, and stamped by a registered civil engineer; and until such time staff provide additional information on the storm sewer and sanitary sewer systems. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL US PERMIT SP #94-04, BY GORDON HEDLUND: Per Section 205.24.4.D and 205.24.5.A of the Fridley City Code, to allow construction in the CRP-2 District (Flood Fringe) on Lots.29, 30, and 31, Block X, Riverview Heights, �"�,, � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. MAY 4 1994 PAGE 23 generally located on the south side of Cheryl Street west of Broad Avenue. MOTION by Ms. Savage, seconded by Mr. Saba, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPER80N RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 9:35 P.M. Ms. McPherson stated this property is a vacant lot located at the intersection of Cheryl Street and Broad Avenue. It meets the minimum lot area and lot width requirements and also the setback requirements. The current drainage is such that the drainage flows from south to north towards Cheryl Street where most of the run off is caught by the catch basin located at the northwest corner of the parcel. Once it enters the catch basin, it enters a pipe which flows to Springbrook Creek. It appears that a portion of the water remains on the parcel in both the southwest and southeast corners. Water from the parcel to the west also flows onto the subject parcel. Water from the development would be instead directed to the west and south lot lines. In order to continue the natural drainage pattern the water needs to again go north. Staff is requesting that well defined drainage swales be located along the west and south property lines. The petitioner is. proposing a small retaining wall along the south property line; however, there does not appear to be adequate slo�e to direct the water out of the southwest corner and towards the northwest corner of the property. It is possible that a pipe of some sort may be needed and that the swale may not adequately address the drainage in this situation. Again, a registered civil engineer would be able to determine if the swale would be adequate. Staff are requesting that a drainage plan be submitted by a registered civil engineer and an erosion control plan be provided. Again, the remaining issues are similar. The hold harmless agreement is required, saving as many of the mature trees as possible, and combining the properties into one PIN. Ms. McPherson stated staff is requesting the Planning Commission conduct the public Yiearing but table any action on the request until receipt of the necessary information. Mr. Oquist asked to clarify that the pipe was underground and that there would need to be a storm sewer connection at the south corner. Ms. McPherson stated this was correct. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 4, 1994 PAGE 24 Mr. Hedlund stated he thought the drainage was adequate. The surveyor knows what he is doing when he states this will work without the pipe. Mr. Clark Nason asked staff to clarify the elevations. If the home is built as he thinks, the foundation will be two feet above his current ceiling height. Ms. McPherson stated the elevation on Cheryl Street at the driveway is 817 feet. The top block of the foundation is to be at 823.9 which would be a difference of almost seven feet. It looks like the ground level at the �ouse next door is at 818 at the north corner and 817 feet at the south corner of the garage. Mr. Nason stated he sees no reason for this and to make others suffer. The laws were changed in 1976. He has �ived there since 1966. Things change and nothing is done. The sewer system is terrible. He has had numerous times that the sewer has backed up into his basement, he has lost a lot of.�oney, and the City has done nothing about it. He is opposed to adding homes until something is done about the sewer system. When the pumping station goes out, it's an act of God. When his basement is flooded, it's an act of God but it comes through the City sewer system. Mr. Nason stated the run off is now coming downhill towards his home where it used to go to the river. The streets �ere gravel, but are now blacktop. They built everything up because of the manmade dike. With the additional building, where will all the water go? He is not tearing anyone down for building, but he does not want to look out his kitchen window at ground and someone building seven feet above him. Ms. Brady stated she has the same concerns with this request as with the previous two requests - sewer problems, water run off, etc. She is not.anti-building either in appropriate places and at appropriate times. Here you have a much bigger lot and the size of the house would be more appropriate. The height is a problem. She did not know if there was a plan for the neighborhood. The neighbors need to be asked what we want for our neighborhood. More shouTd be put into helping the people fix up their homes and make the homes worth mor�. This is not helping. The direction should be put into helping the people that are already living there rather than compounding the problem. Mr. Peterson stated he is concerned about aesthetics. If the buildings are two story and a high elevation, it is not right.. This should be limited to a one-story house with a low roof to have less impact on the other property owners. Because of changes in the laws, it ruins it for the rest of the people. ,� � e � ^` PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. MAY 4, 1994 PAGE 25 Saying you cannot regulate the height is not good enough. This impacts the neighbors who will have to look at this every day. Mr. M. E. Thompson referred to preserving the trees. If the lot is filled with four feet of dirt, all the trees will die. Ms. Brady asked how many vacant lots were in that area. Ms. McPherson stated the City has an inventory but she could not say how many parcels were in that area. Ms. Diane Lott wondered if the City could come up with a plan for these properties that would be good for the whole neighborhood. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to close the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTINa AYE, VICE-CBAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PIIBLIC HEARING CL08ED AT 9550 P.M. Mr. Saba stated about two years ago the City was not as concerned about what was defined as a flood fringe area because there were no floods. Because of some of the concerns expressed tonight, � perhaps the City should be concerned about the flood fringe area. The most the City can do is protect what is there. The vacant lots will be developed and there will p�obably be homes built on those lots. Concerns about drainage are very valid concerns that should be addressed before recommending approval or disapproval of the requests. The sanitary sewer probl,ems must be addressed whether properties are developed or not. Mr. Saba stated he would like to see the trees. stay as they are but, if someone wants to develop the property, the City must stay in the confines of the federal, state and local regulations in terms of building in a flood fringe area. The elevation is up to the builder and the person who buys the land. If a builder builds a house that stands out, this will limit the market. On all these properties, there must be a good definition of the drainage and he recommends this be done by a certified engineer. He would recommend to table consideration. Mr. Oquist agreed. Along with the drainage and sewer, is there a Comprehensive Plan for the area and is the Commission being consistent with that in the kind of housing that is being built there. Ms. Savage stated this is certainly something that can be discussed but the Commission does not have that information. The concerns expressed will be on record and the neighbors will have ^ further opportunity to express their concerns to the City Council. C PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 4, 1994 PAGE 26 MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Ms. Savage, to table consideration of Special Use Permit, SP #94-04, to allow construction in the CRP-2 District (Flood Fringe) on Lots 29, 30 and 31, Block X, Riverview Heights, until submission of a drainage and erosion control plan designed, signed, and stamped by a registered civil engineer; and until such time staff provide additional information on the storm sewer and sanitary sewer systems. ' IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CBAIRPERSON RONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOII3LY. Ms. McPherson stated staff will work with the petitioner to gather the requested information regarding the drainage plans, the sewer back-ups, the street elevations, etc. Once that information is put together, a meeting date will be set, and the City will re-notify all persons who received notices the first time. Notices will be sent approximately 10 days prior to the meeting. Mr. Oquist stated, until there is a true site plan, it is going to be difficult to truly identify the drainage. 6. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING OF APRIL 7. 1994 MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Savage, to receive the Apri1 7, 1994, `Housing & Redevelopment Authority minutes as written. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED iJNANIMOIISLY. ADJOURNMENT• MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to adjourn the meeting. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON RONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE MAY 4, 1994, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:03 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Lavonn Cooper Recording Secretary /"� /"1 � o � S I G N— IN S H E E T � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, Wednesday, May 4, 1994 �� -� �� I� STAFF REPORT Community Development Department Appeals Commission Date Planning Commission Date = City Council Date APPLICATION NLJMBER: WR #94-01 PETITIONER: Paul Harstad for Keith Harstad, owner LOCATION: 5470 and 5490 East Danube Road N.E. REqIIEST• May 18, 1994 The petitioner requests that a wetland replacement plan.be approved to allow the filling o� 2,800 square feet of Type 4 wetland. The replacement plan proposes to create 2,500 square feet of Type 4 wetland on site. The petitioner has also applied for a variance to reduce the front yard setbacks on both parcels to reduce the impact to the wetland. The Appeals Commission will review the variance request at its May 24, 1994 meeting. � The history regarding the wetland on the subject parcel is lengthy: * February 23, 1973; letter from James London to Nasim Qu�eshi confirming that the subject parcel would be exempt from water main, sanitary sewer and street assessments. � � June 13, 1977; the DNR declares that the wetlands located in Innsbruck North 2nd Addition fal� under its jurisdiction. September 7, 1977; Keith Harstad requests a meeting in order to resolve the issues regarding the DNR jurisdiction. * September 19, 1977; the DNR clarifies its position regarding its authority over the lots in question. The City is to inform any builder that it is their responsibility to obtain all necessary permits. Paul Harstad WR #94-01 Page 2 * November 14, 1977; area residents attempt to obtain support from the Commissioner of Natural Resources to reconsider the DNR's position. * December 16, 1977; letter from the DNR stating that Mr. Harstad has not made permit application. * January 9, 1978; discussion at the City Council meeting determined that the City Council would notify the DNR regarding building permit applications on lots affected by DNR protected wetlands. * July 18, 1978; discussion at the Environmental Commission regarding a moratorium on the filling of the lots in Innsbruck and the forming of a study group on water quality. * August 1, 1978; staff notified "owner" to cease illegal dumping on the subject parcel. �a � � * August 7, 1978; discussion at the City Council regarding the Commission's action. The City Council directed staff to stop any illegal dumping which was�occurring, and to work�up costs to acquire the vacant property in the area. Estimated � cost to benefitting owners was $4,445.00 (total cost of 40,000 for both lots). � * The City issued a land alteration permit to Hearthstone Homes in 1986 to fill the property from the lot line to the drainage easement. Filling did not occur to the e�rtent the permit allowed. The permit expired on December 31, 1986. No subsequent permits have been issued. * The 1977 aerial photo showed that an extensive Type 3 or 4 wetland was located on the property. * The 1981 aerial showed that filling liad occurred on a small portion of the wetland on Lot 5. * The 1985 aerial showed that no further filling had occurred. * In 1993, staff inet with the petitioner on site as a result from a neighborhood complaint regarding possible illegal filling. The petitioner was informed that he would need to comply with the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act prior to the issuance of a building permit. � �-..� Paul Harstad � #94-01 Page 3 ANALYSIS- Request �� The petitioner is proposing to construct single family dwellings on both Lot 5(5490 East Danube) and Lot 6(5470 East Danube, the subject parcel). The lots were platted in 1976. Both lots are vacant and are zoned R-1, Single Family Dwelling. The lots meet the minimum lot area requirements. Located on Lot 6 is a Type 4 wetland. Wetlands of this type are characterized by open water with a depth of 2 to 3 feet. Vegetation.associated with the wetland includes cottonwood, black willow, dogwood, reed canary grass, and pinkweed. This wetland is part of the overall drainage system in the neighborhood. Neighborhood Drainaqe The wetland on the subject parcel receives storm water from a portion of the subwatershed defined by Matterhorn Drive on the. west, Gardena Avenue on the north, and I-694 on the south (see enclosed map entitled "sub watershed"). Water from west of West Danube Road enters the west side of the wetland north of the subject parcels. It is then discharged on the east side of the wetland through a pipe under East Danube Road and flows.into Farr Lake. Water from north of North Innsbruck Drive and from Innsbruck Townhomes to the east also flows into Farr Lake. Wetland Replacement Plan Wetland Delineation The petitioner has submitted a grading plan showing the extent of the wetland. A narrative description was also submitted as part of the delineation. However, a number of items are missing which are required to be submitted as part of the delineation: 1. 2. 3. 4. �^, 5. Wetland location with a public land survey coordinate of the wetland center. The overall size of the wetland, including that portion not on the subject parcel. The wetland type as defined by USFW Circular 39 and National Wetland Inventory mapping conventions. A soils map or soils information provided by soil borings. The size of the watershed draining into the wetland area. Paul Harstad � #94-01 Page 4 6. Location of inlets and outlets. 7. A map or written description of the land use within one mile of the watershed. 8. Evidence of ownership. Staff inet with Kate Drewry, Rice Creek Watershed Administrator on site May 10, 1994. She supplied staff with the original delineation submitted by the.petitioner in April 1993. The current delineation does not extend the wetland boundary to the same limits as the 1993 delineation. An additional site visit by the City's consultant; on May 11, 1994, confirmed the current delineation as accurate, however, the change in delineations should be explained by the petitioner. Further evidence supporting the current delineation as identified above should be provided by the petitioner. � Sequencing The petitioner has provided three alternatives to avoid impact to the wetland: 1. Choose not to build on Lot 6. 2. Construct a home on pilings on Lot 6. 3. Build a smaller home on Lot 6. The petitioner dismisses Alternative #1 using the takings argument. This is based on the reason that the lot was platted as a"buildable" lot; and by the City�s plat approval, permission was granted to build on the lot. The petitioner has also indicated that exemption 24 from the State Statute applies in this case. Exemption 24 states: Development projects and ditch improvement projects in the state that have received preliminary or final plat approval, or infrastructure that has been installed, or having local site plan approval, conditional use permits, or similar official approval by a governing body or government agency, within the dates of July 1, 1986 and January 1, 1992 are exempt. a � While the City approved the plat in 1976, no work occurred on the subject parcel within the time frame specified, with the exception of the land alteration permit issued May 1986. The land alteration permit was not fully executed by the applicant i� ,� Paul Harstad WR #94-01 Page 5 and expired December 31, 1986. No further permits were applied for or issued for the subject parcel. While utilities were stubbed to the parcel at the time of platting, staff is reluctant to broaden the interpretation of the exemption outside of the years stated in the statutes. The Board of Water and Soil resources has the regulatory authority to make that interpretation. The O-4 District adopts by reference all parts of the Wetland Conservation Act and its Administrative Rules. The petitioner does not provide expert testimony from a registered structural engineer to support the statements dismissing Alternative #2. Information from such a professional should be submitted as part of the plan. The petitioner has argued in Alternative #3 that a house small enough to avoid all impacts at the required setback would need to be 15 x 45 feet. The petitioner is correct in stating that this size house would not meet the minimum dwelling size of 1,020 square feet. However, if a front yard variance were granted from 35 feet to 20 feet, a house pad of 30 x 50 feet could be constructed. This would allow a dwelling unit of 1,020 square feet and a garage of 576 square feet. A second story could be placed on the house, bringing the total amount of livable square feet to approximately 2,500.. This is close.to the size dwelling being proposed by the petitioner and is similar to other homes in the neighborhood. In addition, this alternative would eliminate the need for most wetland impacts. The petitioner could possibly qualify for the exemption allowing the filling of up to 400 square feet per year. The petitioner also did not explore the use of retaining walls to reduce the amount of fill needed around the dwellina unit. Replacement Ratio The petitioner has proposed to mitigate the wetland impact on site using both Lot 5 and Lot 6. However, the rate of replacement is at or below 1:1. If no setback variances are granted, the ratio is less than 1:1. As with the wetland delineation, information required by the 0-4 regulations is missing from the replacement plan: 1. Wetland location. 2. Size of wetland. !"`, 3. Items 1-8 listed under the delineation section above. Paul Harstad WR #94-01 Page 6 4. A description of the size and type of wetland that will be created as a result of the replacement plan. 5. Plan and profile views of the replacement wetland with fixed photo reference points for monitoring. 6. Type of construction �ethods to be used, including the best managements practices to protect water quality. 7. Soils information required to determine the capability of the site to support wetland creation. 8. Timetable of how and when implementation will occur and be completed. 9. The Board of Water and Soil Resources notice to be recorded against the property. 10. A signed statement regarding the wetland's previous restoration and/or creation, the relationship of exemptions to the created wetland, and that the wetland will not be created with public funds. c 1 � 11. A detailed monitoring plan, including proposed dates and �\ activities to occur on those dates. As discussed earlier, a question remains as to whether the delineation is accurate. If the delineation is not accurate, the replacement plan would not be applicable. The petitioner has stated that the 1:1 ratio is acceptable because application for wetl�nd impact was made to the Watershed District under the Interim Program. In addition, the Watershed District would have required the approval and permit issuance to occur prior to the start of the Permanent Program on January 1, 1994. The petitioner, therefore, is required to comply with the Permanent Program and the 0-4 regulations. The City cannot approve a replacement plan with a ratio of less than 2:1. RECOMMENDATION/STIPIILATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the replacement plan as proposed based on the following findings of fact: 1. Feasible and prudent alternatives exist which avoid impacts to the wetlands (Section 205.27.05.D.(3)). 2. The proposed replacement ratio is less than the 2:1 ratio required by Section 205.27.10.D. �, � WR 4�94-01 Paul Harstad �}. �/� /�' t ' �► \ . Q l�i �;� A � l¢,1 - - i.a.`'`�� (;� ° ��e: `,: ' - ��' -` .�Y� `•r► (s) ��t � �Rb.� � � � � � � i� Ate: � \ � � A% 1 !.. 7v 'r" �� w � �,1 ' `1� � , r�• �. l� � ,,. �F' �4� � � ,�� "' ' l4� "�ti �' � (» �', �� r � � � � R r� �;� � � , • r �� r�7r' - // 'r ♦ / �> Q• •l� �.I j� � « .O i.�� 1j1� .i�' �:� W � `�� s ` ..F"��eR 1 r1' �L%�� "'. � /l � � � � �'�/ � � . o � °~� �i�i ��'' �" � � l� t r � ;1M) �y�i r�� f _� s 6 . 1��„�, J• � .� �l��1,: � r ` �y� 1 �t G ,�,'1 �`'.�%r• �'�y'�l � l��• � • � . s� � , � ,�� 1 i N� a � � �� _ � 4��(,�� L b �} t� � � � (� /� '� � .� �' �� • q; . �.nr�' � r � $ •• � .. tl � (f� .t lf� � � 1 6ar ' � "�-�'� � .. ¢ �� . . � ��, t '� '�p� � l-y� . F.� . �, .� � Z� � �� '�r'v' r�� vr � � (1�) °':�. �'� � i t �"' �� 1+ `.�' .«w�! '" � / Q l�• , � � 0 1+� f 1� I� it �►) ,� i . � � � i �'� / y'-- c ��M ~ �� '�' I , � //ii� M� �) � � � � ° �„ �ls „ (� 9 l�I . � �,� � a�� 4 :c � �' l �O 1 l n ? . � � � �� ,�, 9� .�� 4 �. , �..��/ ��i, �` (� "' t � i � ;� � . � � w ; �? '"� , � .y �� , ��) , . '�'' , . � � � �� 9 � � � pj • r� i , r{�(�) �P � _ :`� �r;�'' ,,►� � '� f�' '9 � (3 6� � � ��p„�'�. .e .r�i 1 rp) � t �j �.�, '��'' �,� : �G� � r�0 �`f t B �. � l , �� '"�'' . F -� � � � a ; !� � , r . r �j� l/�3 a C!� (�) ip' � � .t� �A� ' iM � ' ./ , ' �, e. il' /.r ir' s� : �� ;� � � � (�, 's +� � �7i�' � `�,,,�,, (I� �`� ��_ � ��, j ('�) � le fs� i�, s. � '� -�� _r ., ' � ��% �� M� ! � __ � � '� �� '"� � l�n - ,, � � i . , _ � �� ,� �� -- ;;�.. ��, . �, , � . ; •• 't y�y " � i -•�1 •• � l _ 1 �•.. _ �` � , �� tl 1 �. � . �'�rr. -•s. A ' - 4 �__ / LOCATION MAP �.:�,'"P�:_�_ y y.: �� :- f � � _�----� � � - � � � t�a�zi�.�i ��K ' ,. WR �� 94-01 ` Paul Harstad � c v �AR NS' .. �-~� F�� \ ��;i ; � � �, . P � ,, �1 .:. i �. � � ai � � ' � - � µ 3. 3 f %( z � : -F- zs v W Z � . % � 6 � � � i '� ,�.. �3 �' � ,t f�'° , : , � s J ril'rACE H/riH - -- s� � `' . �,� ,. � ,�.•- � ..d,4 _ j Z s � •� �`�,. ~ Y•,+' 1 < � . , ., ^ v „� . .4 � r Z ' , ��.-� . _ J �•' N D �F' . 1L C� z` ; SCH�OL ADOfi/(�N �.��`� 1 raiiS�8�t7c ,., I+.__= W Y � z : �:+•- " . ~ � .,, `:~'� � 'r'' � $� P�K � `' r, .�T' - � . - -�-=�- -�-�-_� ��org�. z - = _� . � + � � �`�' ��-:� �.., �� Q �:. : - : : .3 -1 . - �� ' � ' `� � � \ w56aL"r ' `� ' �� \ --� �'�caees � j i, .s ,'y ��-r-i---C-- . .. r�Ga00 ^� y� . � • _ /` . 78.�9.4c 4i 6p / Z i a S r ;• 6'��;��1`p��%�C/fii� ` / l..... .• .�, .�� .�•�• •�.�•� / AN "-' � ,b . .. ° .� ' ' � �'Z ,�� • • p • • • • • •� NORT � �f`� • • • • • • � � a ; 2 � � 2 �3T4 �� ^ i2 � � 3, • •. • •�� , '/C.UCll J' 3 , . � � � S , � Q, � � • • • • ��io�i • • / • • • i • • • � a �� 2 ,� i �' .( ` F �` � �y'",�= � • • • • � , 3 8 9 �, f . l 7' 3 � S � L Cl �E � • • • � 'E 5 t+1 /7 � %� � • • � • • ��z ,� . , �i � ��r�� • v • � VIV� �� °.�_ - � RTH � N ��Li �, ♦ � � '8•� 9 ��•�•�•�� ? � Sy • o • • • , _ ; � • ' c SB 5 y—•y �ar •, •: • • • • � �gq�� • r � � �Cjt' C . � • � � � • • • e )': f �'7 ' ' - � ' � i . li » '�% . • '� � • f ♦ . , ► �- � � � Z , � Q • +i i-' � �7`F _ • V • � N /( _ _ c 1 /: � . . .. � c 3 :/'--' '� • O� . - - I � `� f` �• •' �-ti,\I � � �✓ , , ' '.�� • �3� �-� e � ,/^I � � G ^ : i 4 i2 ?. • • `� • ��{. • � R , , � � 4 10 . � •;; � � • � u � 2 � � ,� � • • • r Q�i ^. t� 3 � b ir P ��' �': � j�,� ra � � 1 ! � f -; �:., -��, b ��L,�' �'; . `L.� � ,Z , b 9 s � .: F A RR .,I�;`�-�. � . . . �...-.. .� � � - - - - �3 � � �-� . ba-, � ,� � � .�_ �rce �; .� S z,�g. . . . i; q � �..� ;r�Ym- .� �1� �.3• d•� �PN; I_AKELANO� , � _ . . ,' '.. Y � ° ��• •�t •�'�' �-- : - �- �. ... .: R ` _ : /oaey �iew A 6 ; r� ; ?.:'��.��; , • � t� 1►` • L . -�, }•il>ty "'�`i� ' s HEIG�'T$ Cni�s�ion �. ^ .:'�,`•:..;:;�:Y;�_ • ■. �6 �.�,s� •��` ••`r' • s " • ��' � ° �hu/C� i ` \' . •�1 s • �i'I• • r • '�1� i r rt i�� - � . i /�� \ �\''; ''�. '-• � ��.�' . � �i'. A e � l� • � i � _� ��' _ `_,��,�� I . � " ��-. � � ---i�.. :; � 9' . ? � � y`� c�. N o �j�o�R�. � � ' i. 1 �"0• yY ?4,' �,. � '��1 �'`. � - e �� -=-"d Y� o . `3' ?� .`.T i . _ i , `4 � .� . � 'D � � a g a � 8 � 3�A? 3 �c3 9� � 9 a -'a,'Y' -- -'i. �3-ir-:: a ;,� °�� ' �. 1,�Y� a`. a`-- �� ' _ _ ^ � • .:. � �. �� ,,a .� � a tr� � e f .� ?.. ,'�'�a_-a s',. .;r, :c, -`- rro ;� -,3�' � "'fi; � -y ��.'� . y s a b ' ••,,,� : ' �._�: .. y 9 9 � J rS' � � �/}.c //(///�jj/'�p -`.a a a a s'� & 3� J'"S�a-�� I ^ Y.I.J(�J/i � �� S d 6-��,� O i►� 0 � i � S� �,�"T�� T ��`f �?i • � s �: �r w c� � � � �v _ ' . �y�� _ ;4- ;"�_!R. — MaT`ER 7 ��? _��c__ .r. _ _. - L% �.'. � �'�� .,�.� � ' c��aE � _ �--'"`'-- _ �#.._"a - -- zf�gf`�• _-'..__ ' � , j� ' � - � 1j d � K„�r:�� or.e -- - � — . _ . .. � . -`—� �- ' .. �'�� - U - _ N � � . � �� -� ��'��`-`�'- - . _ . �� _ . ;�- �� =�___�: ;�� _. o�,' � �„� - `, � � _ �,`c _ '�'C�`. �. - � � L. � _ r �p. 3 ° C',tFC1tif �� e _. '� � . � - E � . � . ZONING MAP r-v� : �.csitin �dr�L�iGi � i .� :1 .� 't:�� : �,. �Y.`. NORTH �:; : ,�; ry � , �.\;; , � :�. '�. . i ',`,'--?�o.: : �•�' � �s� ;"; �':' :;�.�_:. :: ..: �;_':::':::�:�/ � ':.�:_ ••� : :��: ,��.' ��./`.,�'�.:;�/ , +�wu �-''��'� ::-: ^ .'�•;i: '- .-/ :. I -, :`•:•;•• . _ . . r�'�' _ i.�i.f : "� f/0?.$ Go.�4 � t � `� 1 `� � EPor �- � +,10'J.O t107.9 pao � �� / ^» 0 N WR ��94-01 Paul Harstad �� -�� . : ..:... �x'S('�9 ...:: tipos� .. iac.S ' � �EP c ,; .. � �� ` .. � `�o � / tlOJ�/ . � / < �O p�O -::�:� •.::.; .R-- -: o ,<• •-;.� �-@•r•. � � � o h' `.-�� : � .; ;'�.;,-. �• y�;. 2 .� :. 6� h � ``` .`<F_': ^� , .' •,` r _ ';. �°. •• Jr / . �Y ��cS .;. ••' � : � ... ==' ':: �;s•.; �. ° �°' 6ry .' . :, �; ;" o \ \� p 1'� +rosz / (� �. �::: (� • �,` ` � ' 'l� a"-i� •ti•�: • \ / f � Y _ ,.�•.`��:.: � ��= ; :�i :•:;�,� • L. � � 10' �:�,`, .:��.:��:;•..:c' �� •rt; �� v i� h / i;•:: � . - :� -.'' �;��:r •.;G�.� � :::.':. 0 � k� i ` �\�` i::: . �t_ . �' � ' • V .^,`;;°� �.i�f`'::.i��=-.:'.^`:_i:'•'. ! / � '`i,:.; � 0 � � . �..• :. . . i t:v�: �. e `�: . �`ti :: �=.:. � �N• Q \�c�: : _ �,.. •• ::r ^;*: '= '�t /, dump Coll oc4 / . ."t,!. `." ' '� : . .•: ' / � �� . � ' �•.` � � � � � . ,•� � :a. , '• �:I ' .' .: j . 1 ` u6 / � ��: f : ; �.\ � :t •.� � :� •�� i�' � �O / :(. , � ��,1-L�1 \ t/01.4 / ` � •q� � ;'��\� '`, •:\•.��.�a:' � / ' °e\ -'i- ��• .�; '" � F t104.1 � / �O / — ioa �.c, , / g� � ..i^ � , / +lO�i.4 �p10 '�V�� / (�JtV '�P / / GO�� r �O' l +102u' � I�k/ G0� /� N � � � ��a �` '� 7 Rad Oc:s 1J" / � � �, � �� k6 / "� G �y �1� s � � � � � a�� i No rES : �� / � ,Z %'ao/ con/ou� iii/ei�o/ //r,rv.n�d j�eifieo/ Oo/.ry � � — De�ofo,r Erirlii�9 Ce�/o�� /06 � � +!O .J � �.Qe�eCs1' P.o,��d eo�fo�. •M Ocira��,v PioPared E/rrotio.� �� 1 , zaao s9. F� o�w�� / , �--:r-:, O.�af�s S.// F�� Lot 5& 6, Block �•�7'nnsbruck North 2nd Addition, Anoko County, Minnesota. SITE PLAN For: �Cait,h N�r$t,Ael 0 1 N �uPo•ir t:� �i 1 p� I I I 1 I I a�a�s�a 2�� ,��., � � � I :1.`i..r�r:�- .�.i''�:•))i:�'� :'� :1� � �-�.1 rt � � �• _�,��p c"-`:•1- 'p•y i,� ��•,\•-I ' `�:`1:`:�� : •J: J`. i�`. •�.y �\ .`..':; 'r,� . :'•:�-i� ��u ; i :;�;: ;z •.• '•;;:.,; �;' �.; �. � fVORTH 1;�: -'� �: f� ' .,,`�:�: �'c��'�'• . ' . . . i ( .;l: •,`,AO: - �%. is`SS �::.; t%:•':1-::.' ` '. t' �. . ;.• _'/ ! ;=;'�'.`� _ �'!.' /'.�' ,..•`, / I :: . . .�. . �/� � : � `' =:�:� � �:/ . �': ;':'j/ +�aa�a \•: l:t'• - � ..,�„ _ :'/j:; -•f�l��.1,,-�' �..�:.:.:,�. ,'`��.'L. �� .i � � +1025 •z;`4'�4j' . � •� �'i / � �' �_ t,o,a t107.9 p60 �Slma 5� \ � WR ��94—Q1 Paul Harstad REPLACEMBN"f PLAN � ::::�... . . . . . . Fx�s f�n � � . � ...9 h .. �4S e /aC„5 �EP £0 � ' U� n�ent A _. , � / ,o / .�`� e� �:s=:'�=`''. A�`� - � � � r�� / �.; 4 r° `.`:'�:: `. � � ti ��, � 6. �,h O h ir4r;, .~�• srj. � � � � / 1� pt6 �i +IOS2 � � � i , ,� ��.` Y.; . , �a O t ry ��.�a .,.:.' �� ,''y 0• � :� . •, v i� �`� / �-=� �� r .,; , ��:� � � � �o � -.c��,� .�° � �� '.��'�, ,, � . . �ti ;F�, dump Cott .``, `� .Y , / ; tm f�� / I ` y � ��aoT+� � JO A / ��_. J�:' :\,� �� , tl0t.4 / a. ` �� Oe � i: i+�\ �� • � / b . �,/,: ,;,:; ..:�: �h104.1 � ��,� �„?• L� � ~ ��~� ..�h��'�i 1/ _ � _ , � ., I � I /a `` .� 499 'Og / � ' o�� lL +J04.4 �p�' r 1900 � �``_; c � r` Ga�' 0oz�n /� �$00 �q. i� u- . +� 2s �? 6� �° �o�`r / we� 1<,,.�� c 6�� ,,o e �+ ��°`.�h�x � � tl +� w�� t rGV� 4 N-.- - `" la m�� acr �• -� 7 Red 0 a� _ ba.: k vv�t ic,n� �, 1 �;`'� i �g'�� s� . �, , �� i /Yo rES : cn p i � � .2 iao l ta.�/a� iir�si✓o/ � / �IJJdTC� l�e�fico/ Oo%n , � — De�eles Exirfii�9 Co.r/ovi /O� �p tlo .J � Oenot�s Propa.rcd Co�foui // ,•e Denolt�s P�aPo.red E/evo/ie�/ ��,., � , ZB�� s9. ff a�wa��tio� fa �e r�%�� / �—�.—a D.�a��s S./f F�<< \ . Lot 5& 6, Blc�k 2, •'lnnsb�uck North 2nd Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota. .� SITE PLAN r, WR 4�94-01 Paul Harstad � , �n _ - MATT. CI(i2 LANE N.E. I ..�E 1 ( r� NEIGHB4RHOOD SU6WATERSHED WR 4�94-01 Paul Harstad Paul Harstad 2191 Silver Lake Road 1Vew Brighton, MN 55112 James Jensen 1410 West Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Stanley Cihak 1408 West Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Alexander Gonsalves 1406 West Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 MAILING LIST Planning S/3/94 Council Thomas Fisher Roger Hertel 5477 East Danube Road N.E. 5501 West Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Fridley, MN 55421 Boyd Henderdorf Al1en Messerli 5467 East Danube Road N.E. 5505 West Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Fridley, MN 55421 LeRoy Corgard Joyce Christie Nault 5495 West Danube Road N.E. 5535 West Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Fridleq, MN 55421 Roger Harmon Virgil Lindstrom 5498 West Danube Road N.E. 5555 West Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Fridley, MN 55421 ' Thomas Forsberg Jeanine Olds Robert Peifer 1/+04 West Danube Road N.E. 5468 West Danube Road N.E. 5575 West Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Fridley, MN 55421 Fridley, MN 55421 �� David Olsen/Margaret Hume Mary Adams Donald Johnson �"� 5.457 East Danube Road N.E. 5588 West Danube Road N.E. 5595 West Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Fridley, MN 55421 Fridley, MN 55421 Richard Sworsky Susan Williams Edward Smith 1411 West Danube Road N.E. 5568 West Danube Road N.E.. 5584 East Danube� Road N.E. Fridl�y, MN 55421 Fridley, MN 55421 Fridley, MN 55421 Amir Mangalick/Shankutal Dennis Lemke Christopher Menon Devendra 5548 West Danube Road N.E. 5564 East Danube Road N.E. 1415 West Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Fridley, MN 55421 Fridley, MN 55421 Michael Holly 1417 West Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 E. W. Fuerstenberg✓j,�f 5516 Regis Drive N.� Fridley, MN 55421 � Walter Ballard III 5497 East Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Conrad Rummel 5538 West Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Bryan Steppe 5528 West Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 5542] David Schulte 5554 East Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Glenn Furnier 5544 East Danube Road N..E. Fridley,.MN 55421 Steve Mackenthun Keith Harstad 5502 West Danube Road N.E. 2191 Silver Lake Road Fridley, MN 55421 New Brighton, NIN 55112 r�, � � WR 4�94-01 Paul Harstad Page 2 Patricia Freeburg 5557 East Danube Road N.E. Fridley, NIN 55421 Jerome Junquist 5547 East Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Roman Zawnirowycz 5527 East Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Edward Otremba 5567 East Danube Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Richard Erickson/S.R. Mayer 5525 Matterhorn Drive N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Michael ICittenski � 5511 Matterhorn Drive N.E. Fridley, MN 55421 Planning Comm. Chair City Council Members PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a public hearing of the Fridley Planning Commission at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Wednesday, May 18, 1994 at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of a Wetland Replacement Plan, �#94-01, by Paul Harstad, per Section 205.27 of the Fridley City Code, to allow filling of a wetland for construction of a single family dwelling on Lot 6, Block 2, Innsbruck North 2nd Addition, generally located at 5470 East Danube Road N.E. �, Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should cantact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 no later than May 11, 1994. Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the above stated time and place. Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley Community Development Department at 571-3450. DAVID NEWMAN CHAIR PLANNING COMMISSION �� WETLAND REPLACEMENT PLAN April 14, 1994 I. Background Applicant's Name: Address: Contact Person: Harstad Companies 2191 Silver Lake Road New Brighton, MN 55112 Paul W. Harstad Rice Creek Watershed file #: 93-61 Harstad Companies proposes to construct finro single family lots located in the City of Fridley on East Danube Road (see Exhibit 1, Location Map). The lots are officially platted at the Anoka County Recorder's office as Lots 5 and 6, Block 2, Innsbruck North 2nd Addition. E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc. perFormed a wetland delineation and subsequent wetland narrative of the site on April 20, 1993 (see E�ibit 2: Grading Plan, and Exhibit 3: Wetland Narrative). The wetland basin provides storm water retention ponding for the neighborhood, with a storm sewer inlet at the North of the basin and a storm sewer outlet at the East of the basin. The storm sewer outlet runs directly between Lots 5 and 6. The land use of the surrounding area is residential. There is a 40 foot wide drainage easement along the back of Lot 5 and a 20 foot drainage easement along the back of Lot 6. Nearly all of the drainage easement area is designated wetland. Lot 5 is currently a buildable lot, with soil conditions suitable for home construction. The wetland edge extends into the buildable area of Lot 6. A portion of the wetland would have to be filled in order to construct a single family home on this lot. (Please see Exhibit 2: Grading Plan.) II. Impact Proposed Direct Impact Approximately 2,800 square feet of wetland would need to be filled in order to comply with the City of Fridley's front setback requirement. Harstad Companies proposes instead to request a variance for a front setback requirement from 35 feet to 30 feet or �, �'"`� less. A setback of 30 feet would reduce the fill area to approximately 2,500 square feet. Indirect Impacts Permanent indirect impacts are not expected to cause degradation of current wetland values. The conversion of old field will diminish the amount of upland habitat to wildlife on the site. However plant and animal life diversity are not likely to change within the wetland basin. Drainage patterns on the site will not change. III. Alternatives Analysis The following is a list of alternatives to the proposed wetland replacement plan and a discussion of why each alternative is not feasible. 1) Choose not to build on Lot 6. This alternative would adversely impact the economic value of the property. The applicant's proposal to build two single family homes meets all City zoning and building ordinances (with the exception of the proposed front setback variance which would reduce the impact on the wetland basin). The proposed construetion is in full compliance with the plat of record in the Anoka County Recorde�'s office. Revocation of this right to use the land as previously approved would be considered a"taking" by the applicant, and is contrary to private property laws of the U.S. federal govemment. � 2) Construct a home on Lot 6 using pilings. ^ This proposal would impose undue and unreasonable economic burden on the - applicant, and would have the same �ffect as the "no-build" altemative. Pilings would have to be constructed for the entire foundation of the house, not just the portion located in the wetlands, and would cost in excess of $25,000. Piling construction is not in accordance with accepted engineering standards and practices for a building of this size and type. Furthermore piling construction would substantially disturb soils and vegetation and would require the filling of wetlands for the mobilization of equipment. 3) Build a smaller house on Lot 6. A house small enough to avoid wetland impact entirely would be less than fifteen feet in depth and less than fort-five feet in width. This small of a house would not be marketable and would not comply with City ordinances regulating square footage. The proposed house p.lan has already been modified to reduce wetland impact, and is already smaller than other houses in the neighborhood. Avoidance and Minimization Avoidance Wetland impacts cannot be avoided due to the shape of the wetland basin. The applicant intends to avoid impact to the wetland on Lot 5, but cannot avoid direct impact on Lot 6. f�.., Page 2 � Minimization The following steps have been or will be taken by the applicant to minimize direct and indirect impact to the wetland basin. 1) Reduce the square footage (and foundation size) of the proposed home on Lot 6. The home does not include a full basement, preventing the house pad from further encroachment into the wetland. 2) Alter the size and shape of the house pad on Lot 5 to provide for contiguous mitigation area in the back yard. 3) The applicant has also withheld the sale of Lot 5 to prospective homebuyers so that a portion of Lot 5 can be used as mitigation area for the proposed fill area of Lot 6. 4) Request a variance from the City of Fridley changing the front setback for Lot 6 from 35 feet to 30 feet or less. 5) Request a variance ftom the City of Fridley changing the (North) side setback from 10 feet to 5 feet or less. 6) Compliance with the Sediment and Erosion Control Plan as shown on the Grading Plan. (�"� IV. Wetland Replacement and Mitigation Harstad Companies proposes to create 2,500 square feet of comparable wetland on site (see Exhibit 5: Replacement Plan). Sideslopes will be graded #o a 10:1 slope, lined with organic soils and seeded with native seed mixes to promote use by local wildlife (see F_xhibit 4: Wet Meadow Seed Mixture). The general shape of the mitigation ponds will �be designed to cor�form to local topography in order to create natural looking basins. This replacement plan will replace current wetland acreage for the wetland acreage impacted by a 1:1 ratio. This ratio is not in compliance with the permanent rules of the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991. The applicant considers the proposed plan and replacement ratio sufficient for this particular site for the following reasons: 1) The proposed construction is in full compliance with all other laws governing land use at all levels of govemment, including the plat of record at the Anoka County Recorder's office. 2) The replacement plan replaces unavoidable impacts to the wetland by restoring or creating substitute wetland area with equal or greater value. 3) The applicant agrees to monitor the site as described in the following section. 4) The original application for this project was made in 1993 prior to the permanent � ; _.,, rules taking effect. Page 3 V. Monitoring Plan /"'� The monitoring plan will include: 1) A description of the project location, size, current wetland type, and desired wetland type. 2) A comparison of the as-built specifications versus the design specifications and a rationale for significant changes. 3) Hydrology measurements such as seasonal water level elevations during the period April through October. 4) A list of the dominant vegetation in the wetland including common names of the vegetation exceeding 20 percent coverage and an estimate of coverage. 5) Color photographs of the project area taken any time during the period June through August, referenced to the fixed photo-reference points identified on the grading ptan. ,%"� Page 4 � �� EXHIBIT 1 LOCATION MAP T GR��ADING PLAN For. �CQith Hsr$t,sd � NORTH ,� � :;i;`.'';•. ;s %' � :. �..�:: :..:;: :i�, I ^ :.. /o '•/' ��"•�%'/ +�ao.� �� 'i/ .: / ',�j �� t1025 i , ;� � �. � � � � , �� +�o� a t707.9 p60 � � \ / &. '�.� 0 N EXEiIDIT 2 GRADING PLAN /•��•�• •�.�.�. . . � ' ' '•'.'. Fk'Sfi�9 . ..... Hoos .. . e .. . . . • .'.'.'.'./ �� `� � .. /,i �` / � / tl / � / �o � Q y -v - �t -- - .z.- • !}i:' .r-. / 0 r / .� iZ��. ^ : .' \� ,.r '�` ` . �� . -� J • � G ry� \\ �h��N`• �..'_. `= . •� } '�`•:�1:+ x `.'�O \ � / 06. ti� , • �.�' ��' 1-. � - ��•�-,:..:•..., o � k6 'h +�oss / 41 1�`." :'%r_ '` ~y� Fa'C • '�: >.;. '� � i_ . ^'`_ �:��!\.w\:: ►.:"a=-.l'l ` Y.� � r., ,� / // •��•1�• 1-i:C' i•ti • F,i` .�': �;i.' :�' .�:•� ` ~ tiry /Y �: � / V /� / �?4:: `�F ''V.��•':•' ��:� �• t',r` ;'•! v � �`�'. � %� :" �. '(. � �:.�.''i-t i'.'. . V , �• � { �;:�::: � � � ' �`! °�' �� o � o �'".i; C= "•-�. ` •' �'''•- � + 1,.� ' \. •. .,^_,�.. � �'° 0 / i� �e' •r. . • " •: Z :y ' �. '. ��. � :ic�:. �. � 'r,: ' :�L .:`� : ,t • � L7ump' Cat! aoQ � � L =. . ..:: •..'.'. . / °� �'.5: �. :� � ':. �` ` r� ta � �/ / I: A\ � •.. - :}, ' �'i,; ' �:':': ,-. � 41 � • : :. �1 •;)• '�: I` ry` ,°/ r`' � '•�. - ; '•'.�� . �`�1 10 � / r • ,� �: <..�' �t: � � .\� �, \ l=-Z_ \ �104.4 � 1•• �1��.- � • \� ♦ �Y :` ` / � � B �' =%..\��. .�: :. J tlW.l y '� / �O `�.` : ,,. �aa`; . � \ � / L/ . / `+:�'° / 69 �/ '04 , / / t104.4 � �p�' � G`� y�� j�/� r° �� / �. +7026 �dt/ / �� 0�� , S f e �aa W� •� 7 Rad Oakr u- „ � � � � / �` �' � �h��13 � � � o k� r � No rES : D ! / � - � .2 %a f eo�s/aa. ii�l�ire/ Asaa.�sed yrifico/ O%.ry a / — De�olrs Exlsfii�y Ce�/o�i /D6� � 'F�joS�J � ��Oe�at�1 Piopar�s Co�faai / O De�ole�s PrnPo.rrd E/rvolio� '°d..^ � i .Z800 sy. Fi� c�'are��tio� fo �e �//� / _—..--�, D.�af�s S,/f F�<< L o t 5& 6, B/ock 2, •'�nnsb�uck North 2n d A ddi tion, An oka Coun ty, Minn eso ta. Sca/e: 1"ZO' / hereby certify thot this p/an, survey or report wos prepa�ed Book by me o� under my direct supervision and lhol / om a du/y Poge -�– Registered Lond Surveyor u�er the / ws of the State of ✓ob No. 9.n�xs Minnes�j to. Dated this ,�,� doy of�19,�. C� L��_�— Regisfrol%�� Vo. 9806 E�.RUO a SoNB, iNC. L.A.ND 8UR1/€1'OR0 9180 LEXIWGTON AVE NO. CIRGLE PMEB, MINNE80Ta 65m14-362b TEL.'i� �666 i. � .� ! \ ,� EXHIBIT 3 I !O. (y. �J�r;GC11� C� �� WETLAND NARRATIVE n f LANO SURVEYORS 9180 LEXINGTON AVE. N.E. CIRCLE PINES (LEXINGTON), MINNESOTA 55014 (612) 786-5556 FAX # (612) 786-6007 April 20, 1993 Wetland Narrative Lots 5& 6, Block 2, Innsbruck 2nd Addition. The wetland on the West side of lots 5& 6, Block 2, is classified on the National Wetland Inventory map as PUBF (Palustrin; Unconsolidated bottom; Semiperment) type wetland. A field inspection of the site was made on Apri.l 19, 1993 in which I found this classification to be correct. The majority of the wetland is an open water pond with a maximum water depth of 2 to 3 feet. The pond is bordered on the south end by a narrow rim (< 10�) of PEMC (Palustrine; Emergent• Seasonal) type wetland (cowardin et al. 1979). The easterly delineation of the wetland C� is defined by earthen fill that has been dumped on Lots 5& 6. There is no persistent emergent vegetation visible in the inundated area of the wetlanfl. �legetation along the ri.-n �f tne wetland include; Cottonwood, Black Willow (tree stratum), Red- Osier pogwood (shrub stratum), Reed Canary grass, Blue Vervaiu, Pinkweed (herb stratum). The water level of the wetland is at its seasonal high. There is a storm sewer culvert (Inlet) at the north end of the wetland that drains surrounding areas intn t�is wetland. There is also a storm sewer culvert (outlet; on the east side that controls the water level and drains th� s wetlancl into an area east of Danube Road. Most of tbe.natura�ness of this wetland community has been lost to urban development. The main function of this wetland is storru water retention. It also has some wildlife habitat value. - - . _�_��i.cM�� QJX�/l/�i � �, � /�, b t �� / ��i � WE'T MF.ADOW SEED MIXTURE Common Name �Snecies�, Wild millet (Echinochloa crusgalli) Annual rye (Loliccm multif lonun) Perennial rye (Lolium psrenne) Als�7ce clover (T iifolium hybridum) Native Seed Mix (see below) Seeding Rate �ounds/acre� 5.0 5.0 12.0 5.0 10.0 37.0 Native Seed Mix - Incorporate As Many Species As Possible (Minimum of 2 Grasses/ Sed�es and 4 Forbsl: Grasses and Sedges: � Canada bluejoint grass (�'alumagrostis canadens�s) Prairie cord-gra� (Spartina pecti�ata )1 Big bluestem (Andropogon gerarrid) Switch geass (Panicum vi�gatum) 2 Green bulnish (Scirpus atroviren.$) Frnc sedge (Carex vulpinoidea) Forbs: Swamp m�kweed (Asclepias incarnata) Angelica (Angelica atropurpurea) . Blue vervain (Yerbena hastata) New England aster (Aster novae-angliae) Marsh aster (.4ster simplex) _ Joe-pye weed (Eupatotium maculatum) Numerous other locally native species - consult nursery staff and ta�or selection to site specifics Planting rhizomes is preferable to seeding because some seed stocks have very low germination rates � ZUse only locally-collected seed � � C�R�ADING PL�41V For: �C,Qit,h N�r$tisd ;7 � 0 1'�uFO"i� ti t 111 N , l 1 1 1 I 1 P�a�s�.a 2��14<z�, � � I ��J��:<? _':i,?`. �, ; �'.•.:;:::` � :� ;;-:.�:= � '.;: :�,., ti;;�:':^r':�= :'.;:, i �:�: > �•:�•.:..:..• ''. •'S• Ic:c'' :,�' ' • '' � "'" • . . • � `�`.1 ��-`1 �ll� �� •` �%:�_ :\ �TrO.:,•:;:� _:•' �7:' �SS :`t cc:-.\�' �: .:':' • .: -��\`�'•:'.: � : /'' ' 9 �'r .;�" � p �b � �,.'•;'':�:`::.,-'r'�:, - : ;�i. �• . �':� � ! i . 1-:.1' �- Q. _i�. ;. ....<;�,;: ii:�'.. .'•."'.' "�/ � 1 �t,�a:o �- �� :;��,,`�..-;. ��.• ::1;: `�':� .,� , . . ��ry'•:�,.�.;`,x;';t,r�=� �;.;': ''-, ,...••.; •.:,.• ::�I:.. , ';� 4�`� 1; ,,-,` � ,�, ?: 'i `. �./ � �./ +,oa,a :.��'.�.'%t:};;`:�`-'"-'!`••; �•• '� ',�.��. �.� ::::- .�.. . � . ;� .-`.; , _ :�.. • •,, '; . './�' . .. ,tia;: ' '•}1 :; i• ..r. • �� . ,:; % .,' . ti, : . . y ; r � .. . �:r. ��.�: �\\�.��'.'i(�:: :`= . .::�' �.� � _ � `� •, j: - �,�;`r::�;• �� :::,, ;� :: ::f;: ::: t...;,::., ; � ,- EJ�IIBR 5 REPLACEMENT PLAN /�� .�.� . �. � . . . . F+;S�;n9 ... yo�s ... e / ::``= ; � • ��iY �4:�� ti�� .'� /�; :..'� :: ,/:� � +1025 \�' '� i J � � , NORTN' y , ..� "` ''= ` � '�' . r, � � , P �I � � \,,} •; ,, . � \ . / 6oQ pjti ��. .,`�' �-; •,,.._ ' ��=•;.' , % .� i . - � /_'. :.�^ ��.; �.F �:: .,:; r : v�poo •;�` �ti•;, �; • -.;P:�:'<.�.. ., + � �L. + �. � : ;+.: �}`:,•, • � / !� � �14;`� ;.:,,� �-. �]��:::.t..'... / � � � ` � / q� ` ��\ �/1�� : .. . �t�' � �� • . • / ' � � � � � .�, . / :n' � . �. e�_ �•.' i /�1.\'� � Qr�.l: T y; h � � Nldren �'�.,`?S: J.l��`l;� �l:'.�::.'" `! ' OM l. � / ,. (�\`�- ij�\=�{`� �� `, `'�'_.��.. 1 �-0 1. r . ' �iy�9 - � � �' �+ '� t10R0 / �n�� Y = .r,�\. �'•''��•�t� '�,-� \t . •-. . • .• '' +107.9 / 1,\ :'� �\`1.,�� „ ��• '�\ 0 �\� �,,;,'i� �• `}�� •:lC � �• • r' � �u°' t10JB : S-;T 9 9 `, -�� '• ,, : �'-� ; / � �� :`y. .;.'7%i�•• . oa.Wnsums... .. r:�`�= -.;.:.��•.� �, �� / ry , .; �.�::. ..; �� I� �� ' � �' f •: "` ��! ' I��III \ � � �"\ .p0� ,h `t� �; `� .:, ` 2 �� 60 h / 4 3t 1 �` / �A,,,. • .. I O � ;�:� •�~. t�'� �I� 'I'' � ° \ / ��1�� ..,�� . ` ��. , '� � � �,,� / ,> � �,;: ::� o�r I' � �\-� . � � O \ !� / � 1%.. % o �. :�-:`' `��a 10 / . � -~� i:� pump Cott � j;�l��` • �? � ' � �� / 1 y � /��.��ti • r � � !0 / j--� � � ' ' •�:4, 1 t704.4 / k .q . � :a�� .�,`tt\ ' o,` �0 a �� ::` i`:`:�� .ti t704.! � / �'° / t :� : :. ., .( H'' x� i I , / � `nlJ�k' 1 . + aw �o� �e ,0 99• � O5• , `` • � 19�� & o�``�t° +ios.4 `c�o I ., ` �Ck�h� �� `C / /�c �� B�5 \ 1 c� J V Q �'� •� 1. U r +1 ze o/c t� 5 a �° �t� / V N � �`cQ"��.e � � '"�t{ �nv��i 1� 6L J r /Ga w. •—a , 7 Rad Ook 8/J Z pitb / , I� l � p..�i w.-t �� {rG �.. ' aT '� _ I- �� ` � A± � / ja � � Q.C= 4 V.7•: �fl�.'1� � � �5�� as � � � � k � NO TES : �� f / � .2 /'oa / can/oui iii/ri✓a/ � /�r.ru�ar� J�eifico/ Oo1 � /06 � � �.'ns. J� ` Dc�olc�s E.yi.rtii�,.� Ca.�/o i T Oe�aht Pi-opor�d Co�fa i O Oe�oles PiaPased E/evol�v� '°`° � / � ,28DO s9. F.� o�we�/h� �a 6e �//� / �.:—:, O.qa��9 S.//r F�� '` Lot 5& 6, Block 2, •'%nnsbruck North 2nd Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota. Sco% 1°ZO' / hereby ce�tify that this p/on, survey or repo�t wos prepored E�v,RUD d 30N8, INC. 9ook � by me o� unde� my dr�ect supervision vnd thot / am o du/y LANp 8L!{ZyE�-OR6 oo9e ._,_. Registered Lond Surveyor u�er the / ws of the Stote of 918m LEXINGTON AvE NO. lob No. s.n�ss Minnes to. Doted this doy of�19, y3. CIRCLE PINEB, MINNE80TA Registration No. • 9808 b6014-3626 TEL. 1B6-6bbb i� '_--. « � � • • � � :,' �� ►r n � � l. APPLICI�: �L�i2T STD�.�' ,�a�E 5 �ipr # T c � � , r� 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. _�0 3 To2��oUD cT A�aaress � �� Teleghone Nim�ber pRpPF�rl'Y af�lt�t (S) : ��7f�.: �p/i,T �0��',�"S t �e �d3 Ta�«"��1vv� �� street Aaaress � ,� .r r �,/ c.��-�,? ;�:;.�:�/ ��'l/C,�?.�J,o/'� / City, State Zip Code � � /� - " � - �l� _� ; , �; , r.-•�• $ L�.. Navne s��t Aaar�s city, state zip coae ` !',. _ I 31 �'\ �' �.� �'��3 ��'o�f- � . Offioe Phone Hane Phone Offioe Phone Hame Phone L�AL �IPPIDN OF i�RQPIItI'Y 7� BE ALZ�tID: !� � � � Block � Tract ��R/.s�/Z��i� C1J0 �N1��/j r tY State ■ � �r �� 1� . • _.I� i}: : y �,, ��*�:: Y!�� - -- - -- - - -- - -- . r•-. �. �/LG �DTS ��D/%1 `��E�T ��,�` Tl . �j�G�jir�J/�1�� i�`�✓✓I" -- ��'�d��G �f� •!-' SD �G �%� ��'i��y `"p� ��i,� CQ/�.%..S% ��'6/C?`�r�i�% PURP06E OF I.AI�ID ALZ�tATION: %�Ti ��"=��ti �OJJ.>� �' - ;,� ; � � 47 � VAI.UE OF W�iR � BE PII2F+�: S SOOO � � sT f / G�1.�M, •�:-`�' � � �, �. ;> ; /� /��e!G� 90URCE Ai�ID 00�4'OSITION OF FII�Ls �� ,� a � �� % ! j . , J � !�' /" ',.�. �l �/%j,gii /;�.�� f - ; , S'O/i�� C ' . � -- : , . ., 8. PR(JP06� S`T.AR�'T**: L1A2£: ,-% - � ;'- • �NIF�TION LY°►'lE: .._ , ' � � 9. ATPACI�1'L5 (Information Needed to Properly �raluat� �licatioril : Tt�e follvwing plans, drawings, cala�lations, borids and/or statenents will be required by the Public Works Departnent. /� — _ Aalf section map or sketch of praperty shawing all adjacent property indicating the exisiting buildings and/or structures. _ Grading plan showing exisiting and proposed finished contours and evaluations. _ Drainage plan showing exisiting and proposed drainage structures, stabilization walls, retaining walls, cribbing, dams, or other protective items. _(�lculations for and approximate quantities of excavation and/or f ill required. _ Sic�ed statene�t fran the praperty owner acoepting responsibilty for the operation and granting permission for land alteration/mining operation. _ Statenent to be attached to deed advising of potential need for soil tests prior to any construction on lots where additional fill material has been plave�d. _ Rioe Creek Watershed District Appraval (If Applicable) _, Soil Borings (if requirec� _ Other -��-4' G�✓lo�, �.c.a� r4� 10. 51'IPtJI�ATDOI�S - RFAD BEP+O�RE SIC3JIIdG AP'PI,ICAT�N: a. A surety bond or oeritified check in the amount of S (58 of value of work to be oom�leted) must be submitted after appraval of application and prior to any work commencing. This bond or check is to ensure satisfactory perf ormance and oom�lianoe with the below stated stipulations. �e sur ety bond or check shall be kept active until the completion of work and%or ex�iration of permit and can only be released by written notification of the City after a satisfactory final inspection has been perfozmed by City foroes. b. All acoess and street frontage of the land alteration site must be oontrolled by a fence, a minim�an of four (4) feet in height. All entrances must have gatas that are capable of being locked. c. Only rock, sand, gravel, dirt, or similar natural earth f ill is - permitted. No o�r�rete, asphalt, ot denolition wastes will be permitted as fill yp�� a deaolition landf �11 permit is f irst obt.air�ed fraa Aroka Gamty. ,� d. Op�erations shall be limited to daylight hours and shall not interfere with the heal� and safety of surrounding residents and the prenises shall be maintained at all times so as not to create a nuisanoe. � 1� � }' • • •:I�rYI ' ?I?. 50 Cubic yarcis or IQSSS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • NO FE'e ��, 51 to 100 cubic yarcls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 510.00 101 to 1000 cubic yarcis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.00 1001 to 10,000 cubic yards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.00 , 10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards - 520.00 for the first 10,000 cubic yards plus S10.00 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 100,001 to 200,000 cubic yards - 8110.00 for the first 100,000 cubic yards plus 56.00 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof . 200,001� cubic yards or more - 5170.00 for the first 200,000 cubic yards plus S3.00 for e+ach additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. ;.�� }:: Ml�,. ty:: � ��_ :�: � 4 ��. 50 C�ibic yards or less . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 510.00 51 to 100 cubic yards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S15.00 101 to 1000 cubic yards - 515.00 for the first 100 cubic yards plus S7.00 � for each additional 100 cubic yarcls or fraction thereof. 1001 to 10,000 cubic yarcis - 578.00 for the first 1,000 cubic yards plus �� 56.00 fot ead� additional 1,000 cubic yarcis or fraction thereof. �� x� �-, �; 10,001 to 100,000 cubic yarcis - 5132.00 for the first 10,000 cubic yardsl ,r� plus S27.00 for each additional 10,000 a�bic yards or fraction thereof. � �r � p � c 100,001 cubic yards or more - S375.00 for the first 100,000 cubic yards plus S15.00 for each a3ditional 10,000 cubic yarcls or fraction theteof . � 5/L4/3 ,� q� .tt e. Any explosives used must be done so in accordance with Chapter 212.3, paragraphs d, e, f, g, of the Fridley City Code and any r� other applicable standard e.g. Fec3eral, State, Industrial, etc. f. At the end of eac� season's operations and no later than the InSL ciay of Decenber each year, the site is to be left in a neat and orderly condition, with maximum slopes of 2:1 with no werhang or vertical banks and with a level bottom. g. On the Friday of each work week, or when required by the City, material from this operation that is found to exist on City streets shall be cleaned to the City's satisfaction by the applicant. h. Upon oo�letion of land alteration operations, the land must be left acoording to the plans and contours submitted with this application and planted with suitable vegetation to prevent erosion. i. Upon campletion of land alteration operations or expiration of this permit, an inspection by the City will be made of the prenises and adjoining streets. Any damage found to have been caused by these aperations will be corrected by the applicant upon notification by the City. �� .,j� � Applicant's Sic�ature: .. -�,%;: i� i ;-��-!� , Date: �� Y/' �.ni �\ Property Owner's Sic�ature Date: Reoomnended For Approval By: .-� Date: ,;. ��i ��'�� s ,�. << , APPROVID BY: �� . Date: P£�2M1'T �IRAT�7N I�ATE: � ,.. �, �.. . .. ��.. . ir/ "'' � � r �, , I _ ��1.ae � � !��,02 � � �-��1•� � ��,-� ,. ,°�> / ,�-, ; ; e a 1 9� -� � ` ' � �'� '`'�4 � �. � .� ' (• 1 ,�i � ��___` _``__` s� � � o , � � � p � o ��-�l � � � „ � .� �� o� �q.E '� e•� r �\ z' ��' \'` O�� P 1 t• a• I �i 146.05 � .e o e'� ,�01�5 ��'�• � � �, r � , _ � �' —� ,"'`r.15'I '� ASt �, `� � ��° 1 �1°'�� "„r� i � �� ' a� ?'Oa�� `ao�- � _ ��,, ' � s � � -••� - 7 cz � ° 1�'� i � 4o h ` � -�'� , ' ,e- o � �� o, �,_- �}� ,4'��3g,?Z�� ,� �� ti \ � �� 3cS9 � • s � F � �� O 1 Eas1 �ti; :<! � � �,. 6\,e�• � � � o�'��"�' i u; J � ; �38 �'29�E � ?a 3n � 51� ,,�° 2'' -'� � � �1°1 � a � �` ' ?z 1 � 7, b•�°A 6'4l' 44"� a �� s� i� e�' � i ` , � o � e �° �g4.�.� � � 's'_ � �� i �� '_ r o s o EAS'f ( , � o , •�. ; ' o �- � s 630 �,�,y� � � �, ' ": o � � �� ° Ig1.15 � � � D/ g� N f �, ,, � � ^ � �a �' atg �� , �� ;,�,. � 5��0'�54�• � � 6.¢4 � N � a �. � aP o '` ° ; �c�`' � I = � a' • � v� h � , � � r19��4 � i �"= �1 I � ' � • / ^' � � � � �I � EpS� � � i �` � 1 � I p v► O � d �� rw �,� � � 149.�0 � � � ' I'go�I� �F. � � °�`' �� d ` � � �' • � � C` ' / ' `O o � ; � � � S.11°45'9�'E� o , �e . , � � �v: � � � � 114�� .�. _� vd=Sa 1 �i�l 4.\ /� r/�� i�; � J , EASZ J=== � '� �p ' � 4g'a6. ; r � ° +.�►� s C3•� S- �, �1'�"� ,• i � ; :,�� .��',' o � G \ �. `1 � —� / � � ��'�1 °� r. u; �_ s59�S4,� � ' �:...� ' � i � i �. / �-�- c9 �: �143.5 --J �� i�; �� lq? �",�`, -�,L ,do ? � 4 # ✓ � � =` e t �4 --' °'� �,, l _''5:71°5� i `; ^r o6 r a � � � ' L"� '30-r � ° o '�I" = G �- i `LS � 1?S, � \ �� r _ EpR�' "+` c�s °�° �,°; i = - ' 4� � � ,N , i,��S � � _ s6�� , 04 �� F- 1 / t9 � l� 1•�^ � 1''` �� v � 41 1" 126�, � �, , � 9 � a . �- .��: �e h �, � E � ` -`. � y � 3 Z Qq . � 3° 30 _ .� �40.6� ' � °° pp��S e C' � °r °° �� O � y; -- .�_. o i�./ � v c� � ,ba..��ti4•� � � ` � �;�� 5l'31� � ` � � �9' ` r'' � /` /3 �, �. . � ?�� ° � �EA� � � N' o = i ( oe a� . Gf � !I: , h.a SS�o� •93 '�i l = � i � M �` � `�c- �' � ► ` � 2p �� -i/ �~� gI ¢�~� ;c• - `.?i �_ v o � � o °,° ;�, i � p. 64 � �. r �' �°�. o'"� � ° � , 9� °� i°° � h� � o ` 1 ° b'�.,� •E._�j �.O ��,�°' '0 p� h� �.\ �` ` � � ao - AS� ' � � , N.91 �5 fryF � r � �� a �a � �6 0 � � o ``' � � `1� p�(° , . ^� Q o.`'` SflS � o o. 'o � �• o a ''� i �ty��4 � � ` 1 `r � � � d J, o� c \'�p� � � �-- - 1,�p �=�. � ' � � � 4'" �� ° �O 0"' q`�� l °� �� % � � � �� 0° � �!► �,� . �r: � � � �:�:•�� '� 1 � 1'�. p '�1�0 F• . � p � � � '%j�°>;��'��' � i��'��h` j ?Od. `� �� 1 ° o �� .6' �19 �4 '$ � I� �P= ° t � '�f 4 +� Yo v z► 10.97�� >o �° e� �'13. 8 0 a 93Q" -� i e�9�°apoo"� � ��"� �,��,��;�' �� .'��co\o`��s ��' �—'��.�� — �o — p A p q i>OM ` � � � 1, a Z'02-�� h . �y� 7 / "e B �AY / ( :IL , � � �O � � a�1 � ��! �f` � ` / d �� Q ,� � �n 0' `t�: ��0�1 0 � ,,. — � e .- . � ' ��_- ` s�o � �.°i9a'00'00" .� _ •� 26'15"E--g�1d01 �: := -;,, `•�o , -;1.03 � -i6.88_- -- �`�.i9 - -- ` ".+ \�i0��0 • Q:a��''� � ,�� - "`,A �`a• '�t' --- " 1� ;�.:::. =o� ° 1p�0�`1k' ,-� o� -'n�o / ?.�. h4' ,;�� . . �¢� Y p 4 �,A � � -� �� / 'SO p/' h� •h � � ui S� '"� � ��'yQJ' hoO ��M ' '/ �S e�79~ `? �O � ` o0 f•� �(p��'� \ A �� `�. �' . b� ° � � � � �� ` � .. .. :., .. , .-.bj.', .,.`l.:.�`:. . ,�tyaaY{� 6.�. � .d�� ..<�V,.^;�'.T .-..,�s'3�ks'ry%�'a'�+�}.ilf��'i:,.'.afs��`l� ��W -tE�zy `sj.�E t t's,�� .,v��#'""�;{N�",+� ,' e�� {.►.l�i•iz`-�`i�. � ti��'� ,� �iili •s��tei«ss➢+•��.,, O 5 etii�•. , .� � . .� ' • 9P �tii�. .;i$t : ,�7k,�i ��,�a,� ri,��yr�:.i, y t�;� ,e� � , s:� �' . . . S. '_µ,Y irl '. .x-�� . � i...... . •1_ ��. .`_� .pR �� .�.�. � � .�� . . .-. i: y. ,$6 `� -� . ��t ��7.p.[_ ✓L�'2 �'.YJl�,�fAHR9t�,�l�y Y'7fi<<a��L�Lt;�=it7:•r�:�,:C ��'!t15 z�4 y ,� 2 : „E.. 9 �7�5► '!Q C -6- 4 ;K .� i�a a-: .+s.� r;.•:,�'. �@'�•:�: - -- -`-._._�.�.....xz _,�_ - =4. aa:t�' { , . . .. . , . . � _ �- �o 9 �'`�� ,_,� �� RECEIPT � //� i� o �ridC� � � �-. ='.1 Unive�sity Ave. N.E. � ,��cy, :'..9i��nesota 55432 i;rCE!vFD OF �a. I� D ; E SS , FOR Tel. 571-3450 U� � � $ �'� i � F= ' l�9 � �-.� _` '.��!D � DPT/DIV ACCOUNT AMOUNT GLF PROJ —_/UJ ��r� %U //'J,�- OU ! — � � �� RICHARD D. PRIBYL Treasurer /�" . By Gr>�� v 1 s c�-� No. �'� � ��,,�1 F(,/�TPAKIT� MOORE dU51NCSS FORMS� INC.� - N � /'� � ORDIN�INCE NO. 1028 AN ORDINANCE RECODIFYING THE FRIDLFY CITY CODE � CHAPTER � 2 0 5� ENTITLED ��ZONING��, BY ADDING 205.27 (0-4 WETLAND DISTRICT) AND RENOMHERINa CONBSCQTIVE SECTIONB, AND AMENDING CHAPTER 11, ��GENSRAL PROVISIONB FEEB�� a i=�;� 7 The City Council of the City of Fridley, Minnesota hereby ordains: 205.27 0-4 WETLAND DISTRICT 1. PIIRPOSE AND INTENT It is the purpose and intent of controls to protect the unique within the City of Fridley. 2. DISTRICT BOIINDARILB this section to establish special and valuable wetland resources The boundaries o� the 0-4 district shall be located on the ^ of€icial overlay map of the City of Fridley and shall encompass all areas delineated within the Wetland Delineation and ° Evaluation Study, Westwood Engineering 1993. The.boundaries of the O-4 district are subject to change due to site-specific delineations accepted by the City. �, 3. POLICY A. The preservation and use of significant wetlands is critical to the environment. The City will coordinate with federal, state and local agencies in order to achieve no net loss of wetlands. B. Significant wetlands will be maintained in their natural condition or improved to provide more benefits for water quality management, with consideration for other amenities. C. The City encourages sound, contemgorary land use development that incorporates grassed, open, and wetland spaces to allow infiltration of precipitation in all land use categories. D. The City proposes to preserve and enhance wetlands within the community through implementation of development regulations that will ensure the design and construction of adequate on-site storm water sedimentation and retention and detention basins, flow .� Page 2- Ordinance No. 1028 control devices, and implementation of effective erosion control techniques. E. The City will comply with and implement the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act and the accompanying rules of the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources. 4. INCORPORATION BY REFERSNCL This ordinance incorporates the following documents by reference: A. The 1991 Wetland Conservation Act (the Act) and Minnesota Rules, 8420. B. The Federal Manua� for ldentifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands dated January 1989, with appropriate amendments. � C. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service Classification of Wetlands and.Designation Habitats, Table 4. � D. Wetlands and Deep water Habitats of the United States. ,� E. Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103. 5. AETLAND OVERLAY DISTRICT REGIILATIONS A. No development shall be allowed within a wetland overlay district without first: (1) Having the City or the Local Government Unit certify that the activity is exempt as defined in Section 205.27.04, or (2) Having the City or the Local Government Unit certify an acceptable wetland replacement plan submitted by the applicant for compliance with the Act. B. Prior to the issuance of a City permit, the petitioner must show proof of, compliance or exemption from the DNR and Corps of Engineers regulations concerning drainage, grading, or filling of wetlands. In addition, the application must show consideration of the affected wetland values for stormwater runoff storage and detention, sedimentation and nutrient trapping and retention, fish and wildlife habitat, and the recreation and open space needs of the community. � �,, Page 3- Ordinance No. 1028 0 �� C. D. Sequencing (1) The following principles of wetland mitigation are listed in descending priority. A wetland replacement plan shall not be approved unless the applicant has demonstrated that the activity impacting a wetland has complied with the highest priority possible: (a) Avoids direct or indirect impacts to the wetland that may destroy or diminish the wetland; (b) Minimizes the impact to the wetland by limiting the degree or magnitude of the wetland activity and its implementation; (c) Rectifies the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected wetland; (d) Reduces or eliminates the impact to the wetland over time by preservation and maintenance operations; and (e) Replaces unavoidable impacts to the wetland by restoring or creating substitute wetland areas having equal or greater public value. (2) The applicant may either submit the information required for sequencing analysis as part of the application for replacement plan approval or apply for a preliminary sequencing determination from the City. For projects impacting wetland areas less that 4,356 square feet, the City may provide on-site sequencing determinations without written documentation from the applicant. Sequencing Detenainations (1) The City shall determine whether any feasible and prudent alternatives are available that would avoid impacts to wetlands. An alternative shall be considered feasible and prudent if: (a) It is in accordance with accepted engineering standards and practices; �..,� (b) It is consistent with reasonable requirements of the public health, safety and general - welfare; Page 4- Ordinance No. 1028 (c) It is an environmentally preferable alternative based on a review of social, economic, and environmental impacts; and (d) It would create no truly unusual problems. (2) The City shall consider the following in evaluating alternatives: (a) The basic project purpose can be reasonably accomplished using one or more other sites in the same general area that would avoid wetland impacts. An alternate site may not be excluded from consideration only because it includes or requires an area not owned by the applicant that could be easily obtained, used, expanded, or managed to fulfill the basic purpose of the proposed project; (b) The general suitability of alternate sites considered by the applicant; � (c) Whether reasonable modification of the size, scope, configuration, or density of the � project would avoid impacts to wetlands; (d) Efforts by the applicant to accommodate or remove constraints on alternatives imposed by zoning standards or infrastructure, including requests for special use permits, variances, or planned unit developments; and ` (e) The physical, economic, and demographic requirements of the project. Economic considerations alone do not make an alternative not feasible and prudent. (3) If the City determines that a feasible and prudent alternative exists that would avoid impacts to wetlands, it shall deny the replacement plan. (4) If no feasible and prudent alternative is available that would avoid impacts to wetlands, the City shall evaluate the replacement plan to determine that it will minimize impacts to wetlands. The City shall use the following criteria to determine the sufficiency of the applicant's efforts to minimize impacts to wetlands : �..� (a) The spatial requirements of the project; �"1 � Page 5- Ordinance No. 1028 (b) The location of existing structural or natural features that may dictate the placement or configuration of the project; (c) The purpose, of the project and how the purpose relates to the placement, configuration, or density; (d) The sensitivity of the site design to the natural features of the site, including topography, hydrology, and existing vegetation; (e) (f) ig) The value, function, and spatial distribution of wetlands on the site; Individual and cumulative imgacts, and An applicant�s efforts to: ((1)) Modify the size, scope, configuration or density of the proj ect ; ((2)) Remove or accommodate site constraints including zoning, infrastructure, access, or other features; and ((3)) Minimize other impacts. (5) If the City finds that an applicant has not complied with the requirements to minimize wetland impacts, the City shall list, in writing, its objections to the project. If, within 30 days, the applicant does not withdraw the project proposal or indicate intent to submit an amended project proposal satisfying the City's objections, the statement of objections shall constitute a denial. (6) Temporary impacts to a wetland shall be rectified by repairing, rehabilitating, or restaring the affected wetland. The City may determine that an applicant's activity may qualify for a no-loss determination if the following criteria are met: (a) The physical characteristics of the affected r^�, wetland, including ground elevations, contours, inlet dimensions, outlet dimensions, substrate, hydrologic regime, are Page 6- Ordinance No. 1028 restored to pre-project conditions suffiaient to ensure that all pre-project functions and values are restored; (b) The activity is completed and the physical characteristics of the wetland are restored within six months of the start of the activity; (c) The party responsible for the activity provides a performance bond to the City for an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost to restore the wetland to pre-project conditions. The City shall return the performance bond to the responsible party upon a determination by the City that the conditions in Section 205.27.5.D.(6).(c) and Section 205.27.5.D.(4). � (d) An applicant shall be granted a no-loss determination under the criteria a through c above once in a ten-year period for a particular site within a wetland, except that � repairs to the original project shall be ''1 allowed under the no-loss determination, if the City determines the request to be necessary and reasonable. (7) After an activity is completed, further wetland impacts from the draining or filling must be reduced or eliminated by maintaining, operating, and managing the project in a manner that preserves and maintains remaining wetland functions and values. The City will require applicants to implement best management practices to protect wetland functions and values. (8) Unavoidable wetland impacts that remain after efforts to minimize, rectify, reduce, or eliminate them must be replaced. 6. EBEMPTIONS A. The following activities are exempt from the O-4, Wetland Overlay District regulations: (1) Activities in a wetland created solely as a result of : (a) Beaver dam construction; � � ,� Page 7- Ordinance No. 1028 (b) Blockage of culverts through roadways maintained by a public or private entity; (c) Actions by public entities that were taken for a purpose other than creating the wetland; (d) 1�ny combination of (a) to (c) . (2) Impoundments or excavations constructed in non- wetlands solely for the purpose of effluent treatment, storm water retention, soi3 and water conservation practices, and water quality improvements, and not as part of a compensatory wetland mitigation process, that may, over time, take on wetland characteristics, are also exempted. (3) Placement, maintenance, repair, enhancement, or replacement of utility or utility-type serv,ice, including the transmission, distribution, or furnishing, at wholesale or retail, of natural or manufactured gas, electricity, telephone, or radio service or communications; (4) Activities associated with routine maintenance of utility and pipeline rights-of-way, provided the activities.do not result in additional intrusion. into the wetland; (5) Activities associated with routine maintenance or repair of existing public highways, roads, streets, and bridg.es, provided the activities so not result in additional intrusion into the wetland outside of the existing right of way; (6) Emergency repair and normal maintenance of existing public works, provided the activity does not result in additional intrusion of the public works into the wetland and do not result in the draining or filling, wholly or partially, of a wetland; (7) Normal maintenance and repair o causing no additional intrusion structure into the wetland,.and repair of private crossings that the draining or filling, wholly wetland. This exemption applies structures, such as buildings or f structures of an existing . maintenance and do not result in or partially, of a to private road crossings; Page 8- Ordinance No. 1028 (8) Activities that result in the draining or filling of less than 400 square feet of wetlands. This exemption applies if the total wetland loss by draining and filling will be less than 400 square feet per year per landowner, and the cumulative impact by all persons on a wetland over time after January 1, 1992, does not exceed five percent of the wetland's area. 7. REPLACEMENT PLAN DETERMINATIONS A. A landowner intending to drain or fill a wetland who does not qualify for an exemption in Section 14 or a no-loss determination in Section 205.27.5.D.(6).(a-d) shall obtain approval of a replacement plan from the City or local government unit before beginning.draining or filling. B. The City shall, within ten�days of receipt of the application, mail a copy of the application and an invitation to submit comments to the Board of Water Soil Resources (the board), which will.publish it i the Environmental.Quality Board Monitor; members of public who have requested a copy; the soil and wate conservation dist�ict; the watershed district or watershed management organization; the county board; mayors of cities within.the watershed; and the � commissioners of agriculture and natural resources. the same time, the City shall publish notice of the application with an invitation for comment in the City's official newspaper. � and n the �„� r At C. The City shall not make its decision before 30 days and not more than 60 days have eiapsed from the mailing of notice, publication in the Environmental Quality Board Monitor, when required, or publication in the newspaper, whichever is later. The City's decision shall not be effective until 30 days after a copy of the decision has been mailed to the Environmental Quality Board Monitor for publication, when required, and mailed to the same list specified above for notice of the application, and to the applicant. The mailing to the applicant shall be by registered mail and shall advise that the decision is not effective for 30 days and is stayed if it is appealed. D. The City's decision shall be based.on the replacement standards in Section 205.27.8 and on the determination of the Technical Evaluation Panel.concerning the public ^ values, location, size, and type of wetland being altered. The City shall consider the recommendation of 0 � "� Page 9- Ordinance No. 1028 the Technical Evaluation Panel to approve, modify, or reject the proposed replacement plan. 8. REPLACEMENT PLAN COMPOI�IENTB A. On a Combined Joint Notification form provided by the City, and with needed attachments supplied by the applicant, the following documentation shall be provided: (1) Organizational information,_including the following: (a) The post office address of the applicant; (b) For corporations, the principal officers of the corporation, any parent companies, ownErs, partners, and joint ventures, and a designated contact person; (c) Managing agents, subsidiaries, or consultants that are or may be involved with the wetland ,� draining or filling project; - (2) An affidavit confirming that the wetland values will be replaced before or concurrent with the actual draining or filling of a wetland. The City may require an irrevocable bank letter of credit or other security acceptable to the City to guarantee the successful completion of the project; (3) For the impacted wetland: (a) A recent aerial photograph or accurate map of the impacted wetland area; (b) The location of the wetland, including the county, watershed name or number, and public land survey with the coordinate of the approximate wetland center; (c) The size of the wetland, in acres or square feet; (d) The type of wetland using USFWS Circular 39, � and NWI mapping conventions; ,� (e) A list of the dominant vegetation in the impacted wetland area, including common names of the vegetation exceeding 20 percent Page 10 - Ordinance No. 1028 coverage and an estimate of coverage; (f) A soils map of the site showing soil type and substrate, where available; (g) The size of the�watershed that drains surface water into the wetland as determined from a United States Government Survey topographical map or other suitable topographical survey; (h) The locations of any surface inlets or outlets, natural or otherwise, draining into or out of the wetland, and if the wetland is within the floodplain of a stream, river, or other watercourse, the distance and direction to the watercourse; (i) A map, photograph, or written description of the land use of the immediate watershed within one mile of the impacted wetland. The surrounding land use information shall also indicate the presence and location, if any, of wetland preservation regions and areas, wetland development avoidance regions and areas, and wetland deficient regions and areas as identified in the comprehensive water plan; (j) The nature of the proposed project, its areal extent, and the impact on the wetland must be shown in sufficient detail to allow the City to determine the amount and types of wetland to be impacted and to demonstrate compliance with the replacement sequencing criteria in Section 5D; (k) Evidence of ownership or rights to the affected areas, including a legal description. When two or,more landowners are involved, including both the impact site and the proposed replacement site, a contract or other evidence of agreement signed by all landowners and notarized must be included with the replacement plan. The contract or agreement must contain an acknowledgement of the covenant provisions in Section 205.27.7.4.9, by landowners on which a replacement wetland is proposed and the location and acreage of replacement wetlands. The contract becomes binding upon final approval of the replacement plan; �, r'\ Page 11 - Ordinance No. 1028 (1) A list of all other local, state, and federal permits and approvals required for the activity; and (m) Other information considered necessary by the City for evaluation of the activity. (4) For the replacement wetland: (a) A recent aerial photograph or accurate map of the replacement wetland area; (b) The location of the wetland, including the county, watershed name or number, and public land survey coordinate of the approximate wetland center; (c) The size of the wetland, in acres or square feet; (d) The type of wetland using USFWS Circular 39, and NWI mapping conventions; � (e) A list of the dominant vegetation in the impacted wetland area, includinq common names of the vegetation exceeding 20 percent coverage and an estimate of coverage; (f) A soils map of the site showing soil type and substrate, where available; (g) The size of the watershed that drains surface water into the wetland as determined from a United States Government Survey topographical map or other suitable topographical survey; (h) The locations of any surface inlets or outlets, natural or otherwise, draining into or out of the wetland, and if the wetland is within the floodplain of a stream, river, or other watercourse, the distance and direction to the watercourse; (i) A map, photograph, or written description of the land use of the immediate watershed within one mile of the impacted wetland. The surrounding land use information shall also indicate the presence and location, if any, ,--^� of wetland preservation regions and areas, wetland development avoidance regions and areas, and wetland deficient regions and Page 12 - Ordinance No. 1028 areas as identified in the comprehensive water plan; (j� Evidence of ownership or rights to the affected areas, including a legal description. When two or more landowners are involved, including both the impact site and the proposed replacement site, a contract or other evidence of agreement signed by all landowners and notarized must be included with the replacement plan. The contract or agreement must contain an acknowledgement of the covenant provisions in paragraph 9, by landowners on which a replacement wetland is proposed and the location and acreage of replacement wetlands. The contract becomes binding upon final approval of the replacement plan; (k) A list of all other local, state, and federal permits and approvals required for the activity; � (1) An explanation of the size and type of ^ wetland that will result from successful completion of the replacement plan; (m) Scale drawings showing plan and profile views of the replacement wetland and fixed photo-reference points for monitoring purposes. Photo-reference points should include views of any control structures and enough additional points to accurately depict the entire project; (n) How the replacement wetland shall be constructed, including the best management practices that will be implemented to prevent erosion or site degradation; (o) For created wetlands only, additional soils information sufficient to determine the capability of the site to produce and maintain wetland characteristics; (p) A timetable that clearly states how and when implementation of the replacement plan shall proceed, and when construction of the replacement wetland shall be finalized; �, (q) A notice in a form provided by the BWSR �, Page 13 - Ordinance No. 1028 attached to and recorded with the deed for lands containing a replacement wetland, specifying the following: ((1)) The location of the replacement wetland; ((2)) That the wetland is subject to the act; ((3)) That the fee title owner is responsible for the costs of repairs or reconstruction, if necessary, or for replacement costs; ((4)) That reasonable access to the replacement wetland shall be granted to the proper authorities for inspection, monitorinq, and enforcement purposes; ((5)) That costs of title review and document recording is the responsibility of the fee title owner; and ((6)) That the City or board can require necessary repairs or reconstruction work to return the wetland to the specifications of the approved replacement plan and require reimbursement or reasonable costs from the wetland owner, or can require replacement of the wetland according to the Act; (r) A statement that the replacement wetland was not previously restored or created under a prior approved replacement plan; (s) A statement that the replacement wetland was not drained or filled under an exemption during the previous ten years; > (t) A statement that the replacement wetland was not restored with financial assistance from public conservation programs; � (u) A statement that the replacement wetiand was not restored using private funds other than Page 14 - Ordinance No. 1028 those of the landowner unless the funds are paid back with interest to the individual or organization that funded the restoration and the individual or organization notifies the City in writing that the restored wetland may be considered for replacement; (v) A plan for monitoring the success of the replacement plan in meeting the project goal in paragraph 1 and as specified in Section 205.27.12; and (w) Other information considered for evaluation of the project by the City. (5) The applicant must provide information considering the special considerations criteria in Section 205.27.8.G. 9. REPLACEMENT PLAN EVALIIATION CRITERIA A. Before consideration or approval of the replacement plan, the.City shall ensure that the applicant has exhausted all possibilities to avoid and minimize adverse impacts according to sequencing in Section 5D. B. The order of preference for the method of replacement, from the most preferred to least preferred: (1) Project-specific restoration; (2) Project-specific creation; (3) Wetland banking. Modification or conversion of non-degraded wetland from one wetland type to another does not constitute adequate replacement. Wetlands drained or filled under an exemption may not be restored for replacement credit for ten years after draining or filling. � C. Replacement of wetland values shall be comp.leted before or concurrent with the actual draining or filling of a wetland, unless an irrevocable bank letter of credit.or other security acceptable to the City is submitted to the City to guarantee successful completion of the replacement. All wetlands to be restored or created as part of an approved replacement plan shall be clearly designated prior to approval of the replacement plan by the City. ^' �^� Page 15 - Ordinance No. 1028 D. Replacement wetlands shall be located in the same watershed as the impacted wetlands, or the ratio in Section 205.27.10 shall apply. E. Replacement wetlands must be of a size sufficient to ensure that they provide equal or greater public value than the wetland that was drained or filled. The minimum size of the replacement wetland must be in the ratio of two acres of replaced wetland for each acre of drained or filled wetland. The actual replacement ratios required for a replacement wetland may be more than the minimum, subject to the evaluation of wetland functions in Section 9. Future owners may make no use of the wetland after it is altered for a period of ten years unless future replacement to achieve a 2:1 ratio occurs. The landowner shall record a notice of this restriction in the office of the county recorder in which the project is located. F. Restoration and replacement of wetlands must be accomplished according to the ecology of the landscape area affected. A replacement plan that �ould result in wetlands or wetland characteristics that do not � naturally occur in the landscape area in which the - replacement will occur will not be approved. G. The following factors when, applicable to an�impact or replacement site, shall be considered by the City: (1) The site contains endangered species listed in Minnesota Rules, parts 6134.0200 to 6134.0400 and the proposed activities would take those species, the replacement plan shall not be approved. (2) The site contains a rare natural community, and the proposed activity would adversely affect the community, the replacement plan shall not be approved. (3) The site contains a significant fish and wildlife resource; including but not limited to fish passage and spawning areas, colonial waterbird nesting colonies, migratory waterfowl concentration areas, deer wintering areas, or wildlife travel corridors, and the proposed activity would adversely impact those resources, the replacement plan shall not be approved. (4) The site contains archaeological or historic. �� areas, and the activity would adversely affect those areas, the replacement plan shall not be Page 16 - Ordinance No. 1028 approved. (5) The proposed activity would have significant adverse impact on the groundwater quality, the replacement plan shall not be approved. (6) The proposed activity would have significant adverse impact on the water quality of outstariding resource value waters as listed in Minnesota Rules, 7050.0180 or on trout waters, the replacement plan shall not be approved. (7) Wetlands used for educational or research purposes shall be maintained or adequately replaced. (8) The proposed activity involves known or potential hazardous wastes. Such activities shall be conducted in accordance with applicable federal or state standards. /'1 (9) The proposed activity shall be consistent with other plans, including, but not limited to zoning, comprehensive, watershed management, and land use plans. ^� 10. EVALIIATION OF WETI,AND FIINCTIONS AND VALII88 A. Replacement wetlands shall replace the functions and values that are lost from a wetland that is drained or filled. A replacement wetland should replace the same combination or functions and values provided by the impacted wetland. The wetland type index system in Minnesota Rules 8420.0540, subpt 10, item B, uses relative values of wetland functions compared across wetland types to evaluate the adequacy of wetland replacement. The City may allow the evaluation of wetlands by measuring and comparing public values specified in Minnesota Statutes, section 103b.3355, with the current version of the Minnesota wetland evaluation methodology or another scientifically acceptable methodology. B. Table 4, Minnesota Rules, part 8420.0550, provides technical specifications for constructing wetland types. In evaluating a wetland replacement plan, the City shall determine whether the wetland type stated as the replacement plan goal will result from the replacement plan specifications. If a wetland type other than the replacement plan goal is likely to ^ result, the City shall evaluate the plan based on this determination. Page 17 - Ordinance No. 1028 C. The City may consider allowing constructed stormwater detention basins for replacement credit if the basin conforms to the following specifications: (1) The basin design uses a two-cell system in which the upstream cell has a 24-hour retention time for a two-year storm event; (2) The downstream cell is designed for a maximum 12-inch rise in water level for a ten-year storm event; (3) The standards in Minnesota Rules, part 8420.0550 are followed; (4) The design goal is a palustrine emergent wetland that meets all statutory definitions of a wetland, for example, soils, hydrology, and vegetation. Only the downstream cell can be counted for wetland credit, and the replacement plan must include a plan and schedule for maintenance of the storm water basin system. Storm water basins which allowed for replacement are not eligible for �``� an exemption; and (5) Storm water management basins constructed for the primary purpose of controlling or treating stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces or developed areas, not conforming to the units in 1-4 above, are not considered wetlands. These are therefore exempt from replacement plan requirements when constructed in non-wetlands, and also cannot be considered for credit as part of a replacement plan, regardless of their location. D. When wetland functions lost as a result of drainage or filling are replaced by restoring a wetland of the same type and in the same watershed with the same inlet and outlet characteristics as described in Section 205.27.9.E, and related definitions, the replacement shall be considered to be in-kind and the minimal replacement ratio shall be used to determine the necessary size of the replacement wetland. The minimum replacement ratio is 2:1, requiring two times the impacted area be replaced. E. If the wetland functions lost as a result of drainage or filling are to be replaced by creating a wetland or � restoring a wetland of a different type than the impacted wetland, or if the replacement wetland is in a watershed other than the impacted wetland or had Page 18 - Ordinance No. 1028 different inlet and outlet characteristics than the impacted wetland, the replacement shall be considered out of kind, and the City shall use the replacement ratios in Minnesota Rules, 8420.0540, subpt b, item D, Table 2, to determine the amount of replacement wetland needed to replace the lost wetland values. (1) Differences in wetland functions and values among wetland types are to be evaluated and replaced using the wetland type ratio table located and, to be applied as specified in Administrative Rules, 8420.0540, subpt 10, Table 2. The wetland type ratio table incorporates an evaluation of public values as specified in Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.3355, for the purposes of comparison among wetland types. /"'� (2) If a wetland to be drained or filled exhibi�s more than one wetland type as determined by the Technical Evaluation Panel, and more than one wetland type is proposed to be drained or filled, the City shall use the following procedure to determine needed replacement. The acreage of each wetland type to be converted to non-wetland shall /� be determined. The wetland type ratio table shall then be used to determine the amount of replacement wetland for each wetland type. The sum of the replacement for each wetland type shall be the resultant acreage requirement for the wetYand type ratio. � (3) When a replacement wetland is located in a different hydrologic unit than the impacted wetland, as indicated by the USGS Hydrologic Unit Map for Minnesota, the ratios in MInnesota Rules 8420.0540 must be followed. (4) If the inlet and outlet characteristics of a replacement wetland differ from those of the impacted wetland, the ratios in Minnesota Rules 8420.0540 Table 3 shall be applied. (5) The City may, by local ordinance, establish additional local public value to address wetland conservation or preservation issues of local concern. These ratios shall have a minimum value of zero and shall be based on wetland managemerit objectives of a local water management plan adopted under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103B or 103D. � Page 19 - Ordinance No. 1028 (6) The required replacement ratio for out-of kind replacement shall be the sum of the wetland type ratio plus the hydrologic unit ratio plus the inlet and outlet characteristic ratio plus the local public value ratio. If this ratio is less than the minimum in-kind ratio, the minimum in-kind ratio shall be the required replacement ratio. (7) In cases of partial drainage, the amount of� wetland to be replaced shall be calculated using the formulas in Minnesota Rules 8420.0540, Item E. (8) In cases where partially drained wetlands are restored to their former state, credit may be received as calculated in Administrative Rules 8420.0540, Item F. (9) For projects of unusual complexity,.or replacement p]�ans that have been denied and are being appealed, and for which the City belie�es an alternative evaluation process may produce a substantially different replacement requirement, �"'� the City may evaluate the replacement plan using the current version of the Minnesota wetland evaluation methodology or another scientifically accepted methodology approved by the board, in consultation with the Commissioner, that evaluates all wetland functions and values for both the impacted and replacement wetlands. When using the Minnesota wetland evaluation methodology or another board, in consultation with the Commissioner, approved methodology to evaluate replacement plans, the ratio of impact wetland to replacement wetland shall not be less than the minimum required. Further, the hydrologic unit ratio, the inlet and outlet characteristics ratio, and the local public value ratio, shall also be considered when using the Minnesota wetland evaluation methodology or another board, in consultation with the Commissioner, approved methodology. (10) A replacement plan that fails to meet the requirements in items 1-8 shall be considered inadequate in replacing lost functions and values and shall not be approved by the City. A replacement plan that has been considered by the City and not approved may be revised and resubmitted for consideration by the City. The Page 20 - Ordinance No. 1028 decision of the City to approve, approve with conditions, or not approve a replacement plan becomes final if not appealed to the board within 30 days after the date on which the decision is mailed to those required to receive notice of the decision. Before construction of the wetland, a notice as required in Section 205.27.7.4.9 must be recorded and proof of recording provided to the City. 11. WETLAND REPLACBMENT BTANDARDB. � A. The standards and guidelines in this part shall be used in wetland creation and restoration efforts to ensure adequate replacement of wetland functions and values. Minnesota Rules 8420.0540, Table 4 provides general guidelines for the physical characteristics that each type of replacement wetland should have. B. The standards in items 1 to 8 shall be follo�aed in all wetland replacements unless the technical evaluati_on panel determines that a standard is clearly not appropriate. � (1) Water control structures must be constructed using specification provided in the Minnesota Wetland Restoration Guide or their equivalent. Control structures may be subject to the department dam safety regulations. (2) Best management practices must be established and maintained to the entire perimeter of all replacement wetlands. (3) For replacement wetlands where the dominant vegetation of the wetland type identified as the replacement goal in Section 205.27.7.A.4.1, is not likely to recover naturally in a five-year period, wooded and shrub wetlands especially, the replacement wetland must be seeded or planted with appropriate species, as determined by the soil and water conservation district, the seed or planting stock should be of local wetland origin to preserve local genotypes. During the monitoring period, the applicant must take reasonable steps to prevent invasion by any species, for example, purple loosestrife and Eurasian water milfoil, that would defeat the re-vegetation goal of the replacement plan. � (4) Erosion control measures as deternained by the soil �"� Page 21 - Ordinance No. 1028 and water conservation district must be employed during construction and until permanent ground cover is established to prevent siltation of the replacement wetland or nearby water bodies. (5) For all restored wetlands where the original organic substrate has been striped away and for all created wetlands, provisions must be made for providing an organic substrate. When feasible, the organic soil used for backfill should be taken from the drained or filled wetland. (6) The bottom contours of created types 3, 4, and 5 wetlands should be undulating, rather than flat, to provide a variety of water depth. (7) Sideslopes of created wetlands and buffer strip must not be steeper than 5:1, five feet horizontal for every one foot vertical as averaged around the wetland. Sideslopes of 10:1 and 15:1 are preferred. �„� (8) Created wetlands should have an irregular edge to create points.and bays to be consistent with Section 205.27.8.F. 12. MONITORING ANNIIAL REPORT A. The purpose of wetland value replacement monitoring is to ensure that the replacement wetland achieves the goal of replacinq lost functions and values. B. The applicant shall submit the annual report to the City on a date determined by the City until the applicant has fulfilled all of the requirements of the City. C. The purpose of the annual report is to describe actual wetland restoration or creation activities completed � during the past year, activities planned for the upcoming year, and the information in Section B. D. The annual report shall include the following information and other site-specific information identified by the City: (1) A description of the project location, size, current wetland type (Cowardin classification), ^ and desired wetland t.ype (goal); (2) A comparison of the as-built specif.ications versus Page 22 - Ordinance No. 1028 the design specifications (first annual plan only) and a rationale for significant changes; (3) Hydrology measurements: seasonal water level elevations during the period April through October (msl or referenced to a known•benchmark); (4) A list of the dominant vegetation in the wetland, including common names of the vegetation exceeding 20 percent coverage and an estimate of coverage. (5) Color photographs of the project area taken anytime during the period June through August, referenced to the fixed photo-reference points identified on the wetland replacement plan and labeled accordingly. 13. MONITORING DETERMINATIONS BY THE CITY The City: A. Shall inspect the project when construction is complete and certify compliance with construction specifications, and may inspect the project at any time during the construction and monitoring period, and any time after that to assess the long-term viability of the replaced wetland. When the City certifies that the construction specifications have been met, the City shall so advise the applicant and return any bond or other security that the applicant had provided; B. May order corrective action at any time during the required monitoring period if it determines that the goal of the approved replacement plan will not be met, and may require the applicant to prepare an amended wetland value replacement plan for review and approval by the City, which describes in detail the corrective measures to be taken to achieve the goal of replacing the lost wetland functions and values; C. Shall make a finding based on a site visit at the end of the monitoring period as to whether the goal of the replacement plan has been met. If the goal of the replacement plan has not been met, the City shall order corrective action and extend the monitoring period;.and � D. Shall require one or more of the following actions if, during the monitoring period, the City finds that the goal of the replacement plan will not be met: /`� (1) Order the applicant to prepare and implement a new � �` Page 23 - Ordinance No. 1028 replacement plan; (2) Issue a cease and desist order on the draining and filling activity if it has not been completed; (3) Order restoration of the impacted wetland; (4) Obtain forfeiture of a bond or other security and use the proceeds to replace the lost wetland values; (5) Ask the district court to order the applicant to fulfill the replacement plan; or (6) Other actions that the City determines necessary to achieve the goal of the replacement plan. E. A landowner intending to drain or fill a wetland without replacement, claiming exemption under Section 205.27.14, shall contact the City before b,eginning draining or filling activities for determination whether or not t�e activity is exempt. The City shall � keep in file all documentation and findings of fact concerning exemption det�rminations for a period of ten years. F. The City shall issue a certificate of exemption to the landowner. G. The landowner requesting the exemption is responsible for submitting the proof necessary to show qualifications for the particular exemption claimed. The landowner shall ensure that proper erosion control measures are taken to prevent sedimentation in the water, the drain or fill does not block fish passage, and the drain or fill is conducted in compliance with all other federal, state, and local requirements, including best management practices and water resource • protection requirements established under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103H. 14. NO LO88 DETLRMINATIONB A landowner unsure if the proposed work will result in a loss of wetland shall apply to the City for a determination.. The City shall keep on file all documentation and findings of fact concerning no-loss determinations for a period of ten years. ^ The landowner applying for a no-loss determination is.responsible for submitting the proof necessary to show qualification for.the claim. - Page 24 - Ordinance No. 1028 The City shall issue a no-loss certificate if: A. The work will not drain or fill a wetland; B. Water level management activities will not result in the conversion of a wetland to another use; C. The activities are in a surface impoundment for containment of fossil fuel combustion waste or water retention, and are not part of a compensatory wetland mitigation program; or D. The activity is being conducted as part of an approved replacement plan or is conducted or authorized by public agencies for the purpose of wetland restoration and the activity is restricted to placing fill in a previously excavated drainage system to restore a wetland to its original condition. E. The activity meets the conditions in Section 205.27.5.D.6. 15. TECffiJICAL EVALIIATION PANEL PROCEDIIREB For the City, there is a Technical Evaluation Panel of three persons: a.technical professional employee of the board, a technical professional employee of the soil and water conservation district of Anoka county, and a technical professional with expertise in water resources management appointed by the City. One member selected by the City shall act as the contact person and coordinator for the panel. Two members of the panel must be knowledgeable and trained in applying ' methodologies of the Federal Manual for ldentifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands, and evaluation of public values. The Technical Evaluation Panel may invite additional wetland experts in its work. The panel shall make technical determinations on questions of public values, location, size, and type for replacement glans if requested to do so by the City. the landowner, or a member of the Technical Evaluation Panel. The panel may review replacement plans and recommend to the City either approval, approval with changes or conditions, or rejection. The panel shall make no determinations or recommendations without at least one member having made an on-site inspection. Panel determinations and recommendations must be endorsed by at least two of the three members. �"'1 i"1 The panel, or one of its members when so authorized by all of the � members, may assist the City in making wetland size and type determinations when asked to do so by the City as part of making �^�. ,/"'� Page 25 - Ordinance No. 1028 an exemption or no-loss determination. If requested by the City, the landowner, o Technical Evaluation Panel, the panel shall questions or participate in the monitoring wetlands according to Section 205.27.13. 16. APPEAL OF CITY DECISIONS r a member of the answer technical of replacement A. The decision of the City to approve, approve with conditions, or reject a replacement plan, or determination of exemption or no-loss, becomes final if not appealed to the board within 30 days after the date on which the decision is mailed to those required to receive notice of the decision. B. Appeal may be made by the landowner, by any of those required to receive notice of the decision, or by 100 residents of the county in which a majority of the wetland is located. C. Appeal is effective upon mailing of the notice of appeal to the board with an affidavit that a copy of � the notice of appeal has been mailed to the City. The City shall then mail a copy of the notice of the appeal to all those to whom it was"required.by Section 205.27.6.B to mail a copy of the notice of decision. D. An exemption or no-loss determination may be appealed. to the board by the landowner after first exhausting all local administrative appeal options. E. Those required to receive notice of replacement plan decisions as provided for in Section 205.27.6.B may petition the board to hear an appeal from an exemption or no-loss determination. The board shall grant the petition unless it finds that the appeal is merit-less, trivial, or brought solely for the purposes of delay. In determining whether to grant the appeal, the board shall give consideration to the size of the wetland, other factors in controversy, any patterns of similar acts by the City or landowner of petition, and the consequences of the delay. 17. APPEAL FROM BOARD DECISION An appeal of a board decision is taken to the state court of appeals and must be considered an appeal from a contested case decision for purposes of judicial review under Minnesota '� Statutes, section 14.63 to 14.69. � Page 26 - Ordinance No. 1028 18. COMPENSATION A. Replacement plan applicants who have completed the City's process and the board appeal process, and the plan has not been approved as submitted, may apply to the board for compensation under Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.237. B. The application must identify the applicant, locate the wetland, and refer the board to its appeal file in the matter. C. The application must include an agreement that in exchange for compensation the applicant will convey to the state a perpetual conservation easement in the form required by Minnesota Statutes, section 103F.516. The applicant must provide an abstract of title demonstrating the ability to convey the easement free of any prior title, lien, or encumbrance. �'ailure to provide marketable title negates the state's obligation to compensate. � D. The applicant must submit official documentation from the US Arm Co s of en � y rp gineers, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the watershed district or water management organization if any, the county, and the City, as applicable, that the proposed drain or fill activity and the proposed subsequent use of the wetland are lawful under their respective legal requirements. E. The landowner must demonstrate that the proposed drain or fill is a feasible and prudent project and that the replacement plan as proposed is a reasonable good faith effort to fulfill the replacement requirements of Sections 205.27.7 to 205.27.10 and the Act. F. If the plan was approved, but with conditions or modifications, the applicant must show that the conditions or modifications make the replacement unworkable or not feasible. A plan is unworkable or not feasible if the replacement must be on land that the applicant does not own, the applicant has make good faith efforts to acquire a replacement site and not succeeded, and there is not a qualifying replacement available in a wetland bank. A plan is also unworkable or not feasible if it is not possible to carry out for engineering reasons. The applicant must show that not going ahead with the project will cause the applicant damages and that disallowing the proposed use will ,.� enhance the public values of the wetland. ' ��"� /"-, Page 27 - Ordinance No. 1028 G. The applicant must submit the requirements of this Section in writing, by certified mail, to the board. If the applicant wants to make oral argument to the board, it must be indicated art of the application. The board may require that the applicant appear before the board. H. If the board finds that the applicant has submitted a complete application and proved the requirements in this Section, the board shall compensate the applicant as required by law within 90 days after the board received a completed application, provided that within the same time period the applicant must convey to the board a conservation easement in the form required by Minnesota Statutes, section 103F.516. If the board does not provide the required compensation in exchange for the cons�rvation easement, the applicant may drain or fill the wetland in the manner proposed, without replacement. 19. WETLAND BANRING The applicant may use wetland banking credits if the project complies with Minnesota Rules 8420.0740 subparagraph 2 if no alternative site is available. 20. PENALTIES Any violation of this all penalties provided of Chapter 901 of this 11.10. FEES CODE SUBJECT Chapter is a misdemeanor and is subject to for such violations under the provisions Code. FEE 205 Wetlands Certifying Exemptions $75.00 Replacement Plan Application $75.00 No Loss Determination $75.00 Appeal of Decision $75.00 il.11. ADMINISTRATIVE ASSE38MENT8 In addition to the fees in Section 11.10, an administrative assessment will be required to fund special studies such as environmental assessment worksheets, transportation, drainage, noise impacts, indirect source permits, wetland impacts, etc. The amount of the assessment is to be based on the site, complexity, diversity, and location of the project as determined Page 28 - Ordinance No. 1028 by staff, but shall not be less than 2.5 times the hourly wage of estimated staff time. " PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 1994. ATTEST: WILLIAM A. CHAMPA, CITY CLERK Public Hearing: First Reading: Second Reading: Publication: WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR February 22, 1994 March 7, 1994 March 21, 1994 March 29, 1994 . ^ �"� r� e � � � S TAFF REP 4 RT Community Development Department t' ' � Appeals Commission Date L� Planning Commission Date : May 18, 1994 City Council Date APPLICATION NOMBLR: ZOA #94-02 SAV #94-02 P.S. �94-04 PETITIONER� Forest Harstad, representing Twin City Townhomes � Edwin Dropps and Oliver Erickson; owners The adjacent properties are owned by the following persons (see attached map): Lot 9, Auditor's Subdivision No. 25 to the south is owned by the State of Minnesota Portions of Lots 7 and 8, Auditor's Subdivision No. 25 in the southeast corner of the subject parcel is owned by Roger Frank Parcel adjacent to the Frank property is owned by the City of Fridley LOCATION: The subject parcel is located east of Hillwind Road and north of I-694. The subject parcel totals 5.11 acres. Abutting the property on the east is Fillmore Street. Polk Street "dead ends" in the northwest corner of the property. The property is located in Tax Increment District #2. The parcel is zoned both R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling and R-1, Single Family Dwelling. REOIIEST: HACRC3ROOND : Previous requests for the subject parcel include the following: 1988 - The Cottaqes bp Arkell Development The request by Arkell Development was a special use permit to allow construction of single story rental townhomes for the � { Forest Harstad � ZOA #94-02, SAV #94-02, P.S. �94-04 Page 2 elderly. Sixty units were proposed on 6.7 acres. A number of variances were also requested for the project. The request was withdrawn by the petitioner while the City commenced a senior housing market study. 1983 - Continental Development Corporatioa/Oliver Eriakson This proposal was not a formal request to the City, however, it did propose 60 apartment and 32 townhouse units on 6.6 acres. The developer was looking for i�2A assistance for this project. i981 - Oliver Erickson The proposal by Mr. Erickson was similar to the current request to rezone property from R-1 to R-3. If approved, 180 apartment units on 6.6 acres would have been constructed as proposed. Nir. Erickson withdrew the rezoning request to have an opportunity to discuss the issues with the neighborhood. To summarize the requests: Request/ �"~tear 1994 - Twin City Townhomes 1988 - Arkell Development 1983 - Continental Develop. 1981 - Oliver Erickson Number IInit Access of vnits Acreaqe Densitp Style Points 41 3.85 60 6.70 92 6.60 180 6.60 10.65 units Condominium per acre � 8.95 units Elderly per acre townhomes 13.93 units Apartments/ per acre Townhomes 27.27 units Apartments per acre For all the previous requests, the neighborhood concerns can be summarized in the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. �� 5. Concern with traffic on Polk and Fillmore Streets. Concern with drainage plans (or lack thereof). Increase in the concentration of multiple family units. Difficult traffic flow due to the intersection at Hathaway Lane and Central Avenue. � Environmental impacts to the wetland on the site. 1 2 1 2 Forest Harstad ZOA #94-02, SAV #94-02, P.S. #94-04 Page 3 6. Existing parking problems. Zoning History The property has been zoned in its present configuration since 1958 (see attached zoning map). The R-3, General Multiple.Family Dwellinq extends to the boundary of the Union 76 property located at the intersection of Highway 65 and Hathaway Lane. That property is zoned C-1, Local Business and was zoned C-1 in 1958. In 1985, the City approved rezoning request, ZOA �85-02, to rezone Iwen Terrace (platted in 1977) from R-1, Single Family Dwelling to R-2, Two Family Dwelling to allow the construction of duplexes. Iwen Terrace is located north of the subject parcel. Western Ridge Estates, located south of the subject parcel, was platted in 1983. The City approved rezoning request, ZOA #83-04, in conjunction with the plat. The property was rezoned from R-1, Single Family Dwelling, R-2, Two Family Dwelling, and R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling to R-2, Two Family Dwelling. There are three office buildings located adjacent to the northwest corner of the subject parcel. The Sundial Realty property was rezoned to CR-1, General Office, in 1978. The Coldwell Banker property was rezoned to CR-1, General Office, in 1971. The Hillwind Office Building property was rezoned to CR-1, General Office, in 1988. All of these parcels were previously zoned R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling. Parcel Characteristics The parcel has a steep slope along Hillwind Road, but the remaining topography is gently sloping. Vegetation on the property includes reed canary grass, Russian Olive, aspen, willow, and dogwood. Most of the trees and shrubs are concentrated around the wetland which bisects the site. The wetland located on the property is Type 3 or 4, open water wetland, with cattail vegetation located along the edges. A stormwater outlet located on the west side of the basin brings stormwater to the wetland from Hillwind Road. A shallow ditch at the mouth of the pipe is classified as a Type 6 shrub wetland. Project Description The petitioner is proposing a 41 unit condominium project. The subject parcel is proposed to be replatted into two lots; Lot 1 will be used for the 41 units and is located on the southeast side of the wetland. Outlot A located on the northwest side.of �""� � � t � ! Forest Harstad � ZOA #94-02, SAV �94-02, P.S. #94-04 Page 4 the wetland will be reserved for, accordinq to the owner, a future multi-family project. The condominium p=oject will have 37 units accessing a private _ drive off of Fillmo=e Street, proposed to be titled nFillmore Court". The remaining four units will have access directly off of Fillmore Street. The condominiums look similar to townhomes � in design. They are two stories and each unit will have its own two car qarage. A variety of two and three bedroom units will be constructed. There are 194 proposed parkinq spaces provided by a combination of garages, individual driveways, and parking spaces. Site Constraints The petitioner is limited in design options for three reasons: 1. The petitioner has�no control over Outlot A. 2. The 1991 Wetland Conservation Act requires avoidance of all wetland impacts. � ^ 3. The topography of the subject parcel limits access to ' Fillmore Street. Request Descriptions * Rezoning request, ZOA #94-02 The petitioner requests that the easterly 1.67 acres be rezoned from R-1, Single Family Dwelling to R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling. * Vacation request, SAV #94-02 The City received turnback property from the State of Minnesota in 1981. This turnback property was excess right-of-way along I- 694 that the Department of Transportation no longer needed. The petitioner requests that the City vacate a parcel 21,042 square feet in area adjacent to the east right-of-way line of Hillwind Road. The City will retain adequate right-of-way for Hillwind Road. * Plat request, P.S. #94-04 The plat request will create two separate lots. Outlot A, located northwest of the wetland, will be 1.26 acres and will be used for a future multi-family project. The remaining 3.85 acres �—, will be used for a 41 unit condominium project. Forest Harstad ZOA #94-02, SAV �94-02, P.S. #94-04 Page 5 * Variance request, VAR �94-02 The variance request is in three parts: _ 1. To reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 3o feet. 2. To reduce the setback of a deck in the front yard from 35 feet to 20 feet. 3. To increase the width of a driveway from 32 feet to 36 feet. The Appeals Commission will review the variance request at its May 24, 1994 meeting. ANALYSIB• Rezoning Request , �� The proposed rezoning request is to rezone approximately 1.67 acres of the subject property from R-1, Single Family Dwelling to R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling. The R-1 district extends approximately 250 feet west of the Fillmore Street right-of-way. The remaining part of the parcel or 3.44 acres is zoned R-3. � The wetland essentially separates the parcel into two lots. The development parcel totals 3.85 acres. The Wetland Conservation Act and O-4 Wetland Overlay District in the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that the wetland be preserved. If a wetland is to be filled or drained, the developer must provide substantial reasons as to why the development cannot occur without encroaching into the wetland. In the petitioner's proposal, any wetland encroachment is avoided and therefore the requirements of the Wetland Conservation Act is met. Under the existing zoning pattern, about 2.18 acres is zoned R-3 and 1.67 acres is zoned R-1. If no adjacent property was used for additional parking, approximately 38 units could be constructed on just the R-3 portion of the parcel. Approximately four single family lots could be platted on the R-1 parcel. This equates to 42 total units. The petitioner submitted a development plan which indicated an apartment building on the parcel containing 104 two bedroom units. The plan, however, relied on the parcel to the west of the wetland to provide about 1/3 of the parking stalls. Access to this parking area over the wetland would be obtained by a foot bridge. This development scheme is possible since it avoids impact to the wetland. Staff analysis of this plan, however, revealed that more practically a maximum of 93 units could be ^ Forest Harstad �, ZOA #94-02, SAV #94-02, P.S. #94-04 Page 6 constructed on the parcel. ' The City can use a number of criteria to evaluate a rezoning request. The first criteria is to determine if the proposed development plan is consistent with the requested zoning change. The proposed 41 owner-occupied condominium units is a permitted use in the R-3 district. The proposed site plan meets the requirements of the R-3 district with the exception of the 8 unit building abutting Fillmore Street. The petitioner has requested a front yard setback variance request for the building as well as an encroachment for the unenclosed patio and a wider driveway. If the rezoning request is to be approved, it should be stipulated upon approval of the variance request. If the variance is not granted, the petitioner needs to revise the site plan in order to conform to the R-3 setbacks, or reduce the number of units in order to meet the R-3 requirements. **stipulation** variance request, VAR $94-02 shall be approved. Another criteria is to evaluate the compatibility of the proposed use with the zoning and uses on adjacent properties. The subjec� �, parcel, as well as properties to the west, have been zoned R-3 since 1958. Extending the R-3 zoning to the Fillmore Street right-of-way (or approximately 250 feet to the east) will be compatible with adjacent zoning and uses. Given that the existing zoning pattern would permit the same amount of units under the proposed zoning pattern, there is no net increase by changing the zoning. Further, except for the single family property which is owned by Roger Frank immediately to the east of the development, the proposed development does not immediately abut any single family detached housing units, but is rather � surrounded by other like-attached housing types; twin homes to the north and townhomes to the south. The development parcel is one of two remaining vacant R-3 parcels in the City. The other parcel is located on East River Road and 64 1/2 Way. The housing study conducted by the Housing & Redevelopment Authority in 1991 identified a market demand for housing styles other than the typical single family detached home. Like other communities, Fridley has experienced substantial increases in "non-traditional families", meaning married couples with no children, single female households with no children, and other family households. These households may prefer a housing unit such as the proposed unit which does not require the owner to provide outdoor or exterior building maintenance. �, Forest Harstad ZOA �94-02, SAV Page 7 Vacation Request #94-02, P.S. �94-04 � The area to be vacated is 21,042 square feet, and is adjacent to Hillwind Road. The City will maintain adequate right-of-way (60 feetj for Hillwind Road if the request is approved. The City approved a similar request for the Western Ridge Townhomes to the south. If approved, the City Council will need to declare the property "excess'� and deed it to the petitioner. The City does not have any utilities in the area to be vacated nor does it have any use for the property. Staff recommends approval of the request contingent on approval of the plat and combining it with the adjacent property. **St3pulation** Plat Request Plat request, P.B. #94-04, shall be approved, and the vacated area shall be combined with . the propertp to the east. The property to be platted is a portion of Lots 6, 7, and 8 of Auditor's Subdivision No. 25. The property is generally located northeast of Hillwind Road and west of Fillmore Street. The property is 5.11 acres. The plat will create two lots; Outlot A of 1.26 acres and Lot 1 of 3.85 acres. The minimum lot width in the R-3 district is 85 feet. Both lots exceed that requirement. Minimum lot area is calculated based,on an average lot area per unit, starting with a minimum base area of 15,000 square feet for a four family dwelling. The average lot area is 2,500 square feet per unit; the lot area required for the proposed 41 units is 102,500 square feet or 2.35 acres; well below the 3.85 provided. Lot 1 will become part of a condominium plat where an association owns the land and individual units are owned by the residents. The condominium complies with Minnesota State Statute 515A. Traffic The development proposes to have private driveways around which 37 units will be clustered. The remaining four units will have direct access to Fillmore Str�et. One access off of Fillmore Street is proposed. The private driveway will be 24 feet wide and will be lined with concrete curb. The Fire Department requests that the driveway be signed '!no parking� on both sides. The association will be required to plow, maintain, repair, and permit emergency vehicle access on the private driveway. � r'-� Forest Harstad �''� ZOA #94-02, SAV �94-02, P.S. �94-04 Page 8 **8tipulation** The pet�tioner ahali reoord in the aondominium dealaration that the assoaiatioa shail be reapoaaibie for the piowinq, maintenance, and repair o! the private �rive�ays. Tbe dealaration shall permit emerqenay vehicle aoceas. **stipulation�+ **stipulation** Tbe drivewaya shall be siqned ��no parkinq�� on botb sides. The petitioner sball plaae a etop sign at the intersection of the private drive vith Fillmore etreet. Both the Fire and Police Departments reviewed the plan in terms of public safety. Neither department had any adverse commend regarding the plan. The private driveway meets the minimum fire code width of 20 feet. Existing traffic in the area is generated by single family residents, multi-family residents, and office uses. The office � uses generate traffic predominantly on Hillwind Road. An � elementary school is located on Regis Lane. Nine buses service the school; school starts at 8:30 a.m. and is dismissed at 2:40 p.m. Traffic leaving the subject parcel could leave either east on Regis Lane or north on Fillmore Street. According to the Institute of Traffic Engineers, it is estimated that the development would generate an additional 240 average daily trips. Staff placed traffic counters at the intersection of Fillmore Street and,Lynde Drive and across Regis Lane just west of Regis Drive. The average daily counts over 48 hour period are approximately 630 at Fillmore Street and 345 at Regis Lane. These are °raw" numbers and are conservative in that they are probably greater than the actual number of cars. The counter may count one passenger vehicle as two trips depending on its weight and speed driven over the hose. Large vehicles like buses, RV's, or garbage trucks may activate the counter three times. It is typically held that a residential street can accommodate up to 1,000 trips per day. With the additional traffic anticipated from this development, the capacity of Fillmore or Regis will not be exceeded. It is expected that a majority of the trips will go north on Fillmore Street for access to Highway 65, especially during morning peak hours. � The property owner at 5512 Fillmore Street has indicated a . willingness to share the main access. Access easements should be � Forest Harstad ZOA �94-02, SAV �94-02, P.S. #94-04 Page 9 executed and recorded against both properties. **etipulation** Aaaeas easementa ahall be e$eauted an8 recorded aqainst the development paraei and 5512 Fillmore 8treet to allo� the resident at 5512 Fillmore 8treet to uae the access drive. other Acaess options Staff analyzed other access options the petitioner could pursue: 1. Access to Hillwind Road. The access to Hillwind Road would be direct, however, the slope is approximately 27� up the embankment. This slope would pose a safety hazard and could require an extensive amount of fill. 2. Purchase Lot 9, currently owned by the State of Minnesota. Lot 9 is located south of the subject lot would improve access as the road parallel to the slope as opposed to a The petitioner does not own Lot 9. 3. Cross the wetland. parcel. Purchasing this could be constructed perpendicular alignment. In order to provide access across the wetland, the petitioner would first need to obtain an easement from the property owner of Outlot A. Connection then could be made to Polk Street. In order to avoid all impact to the wetland, a bridge would need to be constructed. The second option would be construct a road using a culvert and filling a portion of the wetland. The Wetland Conservation Act and the O-4 Overlay District Ordinance would require replacement at a 2:1 ratio. Staff is reluctant to recommend this option since it would be contrary to the intent of the O-4 Wetland Overlay District. Drainaqe Existing stormwater flow on the subject parcel is through surface runoff. A stormwater pipe from I-694 enters the site on the west side. Stormwater flows from this pipe into the wetland. Other stormwater in the area flows down Fillmore Street into a pipe and into the wetland located north of the subject parcel. Stormwater leaves the wetland on its west side and flows in a pipe north on Polk Street and to Moore Lake. /� n The petitioner has submitted a grading/drainage/erosion control plan. A separate stormwater pond is proposed to retain water �` Forest Harstad '� ZOA �94-02, SAV �94-02, P.S. �94-04 Page l0 before it enters the wetland. The Engineerinq Department is reviewing the plan and will compile comments for the Commission meeting. A separate permit will be required by the Rice Creek Watershed district. The association will be required to maintain the stormwater pond. **8t3pulation*+ The con8ominium declaration ehall be amended to require maintenance o! the atorm�ater pond by the associatioa. **Btipulation** The petitioner shall oomply �itb all aomments by the Enq3neeriaq Department reqardinq the qradinq/ �rainaqe/erosion plan. **stipulation** The petitioner shall obtain a permit from the Rice creek watershed District prior to the issuanae of a buildinq permit. utilities Located on the subject parcel is a sanitary sewer line which � serves the properties adjacent to the subject parcel on the south along Hillwind Road. Two of the buildings proposed to be built over this line. The petitioner is proposing to reconstruct this line to avoid this conflict. The line will be located in a public easement dedicated on the plat. The City should be held harmless for the repair of any association improvements as a result of City work on the line. **Btipulatioa** The condominium declaration ahall be amended to ho18 the City harmless for the repair of association improvements as a result of work on the public sewer line. The petitioner proposes to install "private" sanitary sewer and water services which are to be maintained by the association. The lines will need to be constructed to municipal standards. New hydrants will be installed as part of the improvement. The Fire Department has recommended that the petitioner arrange to have the hydrants flushed by the Public Works Department in accordance with City policies. **8tipulation** **8tipulation** The coadominium declaratioa shall require the association to repair and maiatain tbe private utilitiee. The utilities sball be constructed to municipal standards. Forest Harstad ZOA �94-02, SAV �94-02, P.S. �94-04 Page 11 **Stipulation** The aesoaiation shall arranqe to have the Publia Worke Department lluah the hpdranta in accordance �ith citp poliaiee. There are a number of trees on the subject parcel which are an asset to the site. Most of them are located along the wetland edge. While a number of them are of the �shrubn variety, pruning will improve their appearance. As many of the existinq trees should be preserved. **stipulation** The subdivision land or money. unit. The qradinq plan ahall be amended to indiaate the number ot trees to be preserved. ordinance requires a park dedication of either The current park dedication fee is $750.00 per **stipulation*� The petitioner shall pap a park dedication fee of $750.0o per unit (41 units at $750.00 equals $30,750) prior to the issuanae of a buildinq permit. The landscape plan should be revised to provide 15 six foot evergreen trees in accordance with the ordinance. The association will be responsible for maintaining the landscaping. The vegetation along the R-1 property (5512 Fillmore Street) should have underground irrigation to adequately maintain the buffer area (205.09.07.D.(4)(b)). **Stipulation** The landscape plan shall be revised to provide 15 six foot everqreen trees. IInderqround irriqation shall be provided alonq the R-1 property (5512 Fillmore 8treet). *�stipulation** The condominium declaration shall require maintenance and/or repair of landscapinq by the association. RECOMMENDATION/BTIPIILATIONB: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of rezoning request, ZOA #94-02, subject to: 1. Variance request, VAR #94-02 shall be approved. �� '`, . Forest Harstad � ZOA #94-02, SAV �94-02, P.S. #94-04 Page 12 Staff recommends the Plannirig Commission recommend approval of vacation request, SAV #94-02, subjec to: � 1. Plat request, P.S. #94-04, shall be approved, and the vacated area shall be combined with the property to the " east. Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of plat request, P.S. #94-04, subject to: 1. The petitioner shall record in the condominium declaration that the association shall be responsible for the plowing, maintenance, and repair of the private driveways. The declaration shall permit emergency vehicle access. 2. The driveways shall be signed "no parking" on both sides. 3. The petitioner shall place a stop sign at the intersection of the private drive with Fillmore Street. 4. Access easements shall be executed and recorded against the development parcel and 5512 Fillmore Street to allow the ^, resident at 5512 Fillmore Street to use the access drive. 5.. The condominitun declaration shall be amended to require maintenance of the stormwater pond by the association. 6. The petitioner shall comply with all comments by the Engineering Department regarding the grading/ drainage/erosion plan. 7. The petitioner shall obtain a permit from the Rice Creek Watershed District prior to the issuance of a buildinq permit. 8. The condominium declaration shall be amended to hold the City harmless for the repair of association improvements as a result of work on the public sewer line. 9. The condominium declaration shall require the association to repair and maintain the private utilities. 10. The utilities shall be constructed to municipal standards. 11. The association shall arrange to have the Public Works Department flush the hydrants in.accordance with City polic3es. Forest Harstad ZOA �94-02, SAV #94-02, P.S. �94-04 Page 13 12. The grading plan shall�be amended to indicate the number of trees to be preserved. 13. The petitioner shall pay a park dedication fee of $750.00 per unit (41 units at $750.00 equals $30,750) prior to the issuance of a building permit. 14. The landscape plan shall be revised to provide 15 six foot evergreen trees. Underground irrigation shall be provided along the R-1 property (5512 Fillmore Street). 15. The condominium declaration shall require maintenance and/or repair of landscapinq by the association. � �^� /'1 , , ,. Forest Harstad ° - P.S. ��94-04; SAV �94-02; ZOA 4�94-02 � .__ .. � �.�� ldl... ' .. �Wf+�F ... . .p�>... �� u � A��y� �p+ll•• � !I ?7 �a\ -��-.«... - ..' `� � 1�1 � tC '_"' � K N 1 �.►i � � � � , �� `� ♦� � • t�odjl ' � sl � �' �'. ' � . a � A�, �� i� , 9� � 2 4� r' ��♦ +�. �` �oo � ie / � Sirp`� �� '! �+ �� "� ,. - i � �l � �, • - � Ii � � C � � � � i� ~ . � �''�`• + , l 1. "'i � � R.. a•� L�.�. (ioeJ w a � �(ip e . al�' ; uL � � � � 5�� 3 V3 ,� . s-:�„ . �,,� v�D agv ��io �•oo �o�o ��a. N � � : ... .. w r . N....- -flf. � � � N . . � �� r,00 -- N .{ � � .�� c7) a rool osI �oc/ --.� � 4 le7 �'ro� �:so) � ��o> n lol/ !o:/ lO Is / d �� Iio I. A T vea-m�, lc,, , � vA ��*{ d + � ` ,' °, � s�oi � 495 �e . , � � � I'__t � � .p v►�* yA�b �`D •ID�Di \ � � � "' � - --- Lynde Drive ! _. .` "�-- :.�•�,rNOE � y•I � s�r. n p � 9i I a� i-,�j s %'� ii.r ,'r�1 ,"�r"' ` � t' s�i "P ! �-�q s I s !r � �s°� � ;�� A�) C��l h�,� �� `` l'!a ; •'� . . i 9 ' c�n !oro �r�o � _ �., -��) (,� ��; � � �� • �r..r,r.,t .r:r� Q�% � -��i'r'.'- ' )� 6B (3a) `s.a•s� /B � _`.iL , .wr }R (roo� s � j�0 ,B fio A� L � �� 71�1�� i�sr i a� � 6A � ,�, /A (�o) y.� � R � � N/LLN'/ND y�� C�Z ... ;� '�i �o� �, (�7-� j e� / �iso !�f ry � i • aanvrroN � : s's�J s � --- - - ., .n _ - R � (ra� ' � , � 'w ��'AL ESTATE �l.o ' ��i , sSirl * �,�1 r �s�o � _l ��a� � /O �AD�OVTI�OW . �r , � '� � L i -------- � . l O :_ • ��/� 0��•�V �IVION J ANd !! � i • �f/O ris I b�rs.+ts f•t.wtir� � � s � �� _ ; - � � - , �� ,.�> ; 6 .- . � ' `y� ► , i . �� fi . �j� • r� —_------ � ----------1--------- �------ � � • � ,_a I�,� � � • : 'eo �G6 ) ' � --•�- � � � �° S 55v9 � ° ----------------------- -----------'----------• ---------_.. , .� --�-� � (ie� .... �.�— ..._ -� NO <�oo> g oe� i cq��,n _... ,",.... . ------ --------- �-_ -- ------- —r---------------------------------------------- -----'-------- -- �----- ... _ 7 � ,��jC) (/BSoJ Q i (ir�a - • , .� ,w;�. , �� .. � yr,:}-__._-!_=----•--------------------------------�:l--- �/,-----?-Y �`' IIEJ�%`lQ �i�NS�o-• ..f �! �r � 3 . ` -"_ ---___ _ __ _ I .��.�,h+►�,�/OGE � t� r� � w • �`'- --�_, .,\`, -- _-�„Cp�D�,�NO. 39 - - ` ,/ � ST �� ~ ; /is.l /,t e �` -� r CONOO NO. 39' ��'.'' -- _ h � 9 �Jr��6�d� ' /ST SUP. �CONDO N. 34 �___w � `�'��_�_ ,� ��`"�s� 2N��S�P. , � ' `j . �. � -�_ . , N ,_-, ; -�..... -�.:::� �+ ; �' � = . -�_ I r"- _ _ � � � - 9'�'�ER; � . - _. '- �� , LOCATION MAP �� .. �� fT'EN'f �� ;°, � a.,, �, � �� e� (�) " � /�ce� a(G7) fi . _ . �' � 3�� 4 Y a7.a � s- :. � Ifny._. _i9�lf�L.:••�, . •• � � � �� , I�` y , (Sio.� �.v{- eRSi. ". .�,- Forest Harstad � , � P.S. �94-04; SAV �94-02; ZOA �94-02 � Io•. :�.�..1 w�> � : x I r1 1 rS 1 f� 1 rl i x � �a i rs i �s � �s .-.� (O OM � .,.tl :,�.�L1�NDE� DRIVE '$� •. rr., .o • rs rl n n sr sr ss rs � .�f� �/7f GG : i'�' � /O , ,KJ 7!!! SE.1S, , OA'.Q ,H�'M �' � '�$ . :^ ' `�, �'� ��' � J �� y �C�) � C4s� (�'� ,i � (+� . � d W ae � , ,e.•► %� �j� � � b � q b e � o�,a a � // /•�YV g z-, � s> y-/`�I � t .f � � • $ d 7 � . f y�,,,,,n - j ,j � ' �.; 7 o S � � y GZq GZO) � �'' � / �.' �47) _ -i!lJ.e! •�4+J � 1 �� h G2a) 4t3J G2�.) �) ^�� G9) „ -..� � v � s f: p( / • r 7f'e J sr t . y' . qnr W ..... ( � � U .. • � � - _ --�- _ _ _T ��p�� N/�'SL. �K �'�� . . � $ �n-r� �e. ,. . . Q 9l� v ��''1�11 �i 9 li.re// J/.✓e.� �°e `; '� N • �� 9� � N /�Ol /� �� M e { L t 2 -pua� S.iL. 26 + n �y / *_ 't/ v � ! ' v G.?O � •�- Z a ' r� � n N . � C .r. <a r. s z�i2) i a �8� � ��' L � •: � 3� : (/� 7c1 � 5 - - - - ' e� . . ,�N. �'�, .r � ' RAo�E, ��''� K J � + . .' .� , ` '. '. • e� 0 r ' � ' TE C��J ��t•_ � � a k. '(3�) 4 (z7) � � - - - - -3 - `y - Q. ' � � � � � .� D/T/ON .g � 3�.kr ' �' . �i8�� 1.,� �.,f : ��/ : . ,... . . L' ' . _.� � � ' iJ //C o.Y�O. / � 7 O.L.A-J• �-,. ' ' r fi:irr. < �� AUD ��,o,SU VISION ,, � `.� � ,�f � �`. �4 ,s„E..e F,ca�.r �r3) �y.. ° • I i��_, �� F b w J I , •� =` I ' �. :rt� ; / � -=�i-:� --_...... -�---. ._.� Harstad ; --- ...._-.-� . .. ....... ,�, ........ ,.. ............_� -- � . .. ,` �:... � 7 - 9e � ,� � •,�09 ��s -.......sr�. .. •-• � u . , • ..... .,; r � . ... �.. ...:... . ' ........ `,j a�; i+p �� w:� �r t�. -----�..___ �'.-�-------------- ; �,9J s � Frank ! y �b� ' �= � n �,q ��oa� 8 _ c� �/� a� , sutcivQ�' c��,� N�►J. L� �� .._ z�- -- -- ER� 2 -- �--------- - ------- � } � w ;t.A , 12) OI/ O�K. ;7� -------- _�..-....�:�...� ----:�Ri- -- ...`'ly) � T �� `y �'�� .s;.,� { : - - . � State � � �'1!. �� __ ° . _ ._ . :� ' ""' ' ' ' ' �' ' " ""' ""`D."' �'�_'�_�' . �K`i �� /9i i +.,,/f",,,�y.., ....� '�. M,'' �� h « o� � r �. ..:..Y�`, �G�R ./Nf7M• yr i J'• ' 1K�� ..r.. �► y ti'{�,� -t / /� 'ri. n IOT t�i � tl . -"` //� ��6. �_. - . . � ~� °�..'_ �f'�-�l,� COf1f�,�R/OGE � .St�'2 � � (L� ��Z� e . � .. �%� �. , �IL% �� r_i �� ' ,, EST ES r ; �.�� ,�� ,� . ; �Q� � �!� uz��' � ` �� s ---�, %, <<� � .I 1 � ''2 w � �•.` ,-s�,-�' 94 . --�-"".�------- _ �'`- � � � ��, �'�� a�� .�=i f �--1-- -. �� %4:r� • .�w }4 ; • cr„ � �� N-� .., �� 7 T ` �, � � S� I ��.....1_'�'�� ' '-.�v,!l�s..",� =r.'�.. � .7 y� ; N �1 1 ` -- _ _ _ = "� � Hii �. -- ". T ---- Adjacent Properties/Owners i��as Forest Harstad � P.S. �94-04; SAV �94-02; ZOA �94-02 �� y O1 m r. � � . #+ o r � a`� °�' � i � —� i ,�� g�� -� g � �8��,� �I� � at� � �a; �3!�� j = d�i � o �� R �o <q � �2 n 1 � N �� v �g � IEl �� s Y�� °�� te ��t� ��§e�� 5�3 ce CURRENT ZONING � Forest Harstad P.S. �94-04; SAV �94-02; ZOA �94x 02 / � • ; . � ; J A�U _ * � ,a . . ' , �% �EAC �,�' �ar 1? n'. � � . � � / I�,� � - P " ' � ^ .� � F � ` .4 �1/ C � I �MJ ) ■� ie;� 2 L � L. K �� P' �*3 � � � f.C; 1" 4C,4:7 M' � . ,� �, �,�_ , a�� o. L �� 1 � � �' , �'6 ;,� � . G` !� , ! f i� , ,•:,, � ~ 1 /4 � • � � GARD w a � � ' � ,� r.l �� - �a ar .. �: << �� .w *f � ' � � � • � • - I �' '� � W ? P ,� ,( �4 ' 2 e � ;r 6 �; i i � 3 f � 1 � s t�. . � 4 , � ; _ /� � ' �k 3 �o ° f � G�ACE H/GH ' • / ,j � E � . � . S % , �' '-� � ' R � �" � ' • 14 _ 3 Z 6 • , � �-.• �'`� , `S \ � B , .p _ > >2 I co"' ' � � %/ . � , ` :' .s,��.'''' t �_. _ ` B SCIYOOL ADD/T/O O� �� '� ' f �� -- W -- 9 2 � • ' � 2b \', °� e ~ ;b � �\ �l ' , e�� .r�. _ 9 i0. • T �, / P`' s► �.Y • � s �. N , . �,�P `'� � ;�' , 1 , j, h4"�: i. .G� , � DO�B � � ' 1 � ° 3 � ` '� ,;1, �� , : ,J �-1 Qr � •'t .24 :P : � �'• iI �� . ,_ � _ _ �t �?7 3 i TJ l� 37 1B i d9 ; 4c 4� tY /' 2 3 s S'�r 7� B a•,��I I ` o � G� A �� Y S ` �b �� .�.� i� Y A � ORT 116 — '3 I� i ,'� e 7 6 J 4 g 1 ./' Z '� Z4 J ' rl �1 �i,9 , 3 . E � � 5 3 4 •��: :• • • '� �. ,,'� B '�� , ¢ ` 2 �V �+i d 9 ie � � � e • • �,��• OkIVE � '3 3 ig 14 % �i 7'� ' .� �„� „ `�r.. • � • • • /y7{)�/ �TJ( � '� � '� * / �.i5 • �� 8�7 6 �.� Z.� �YV,1 ��/ ► -- � . /�/S, . !��s • • • • • • 1• , 3 4 L , � s • • • • • • 3 � � • 3 ' S 4 i �'� �`i'1`� '� � � 49 ��'�� '� - — PAArt � � g z � � e 5 3 '; � � � ; v pp � �: 3% • �.,1''i'J i. � 6 4�%1 � y � 4 � .Z•� , , w�N 6� : -� - L'� �� iON 1Q. -s s� , 4 ,o , s „ 3 2 >DITION • • • • • t� �. . j - u r � • � � ' _ e! 6� _ 6 � 4 f v . � rt � q y 5 A , ' • 9 -- � ' �o ' g 9 � �3 A p ' S 9 • � � .�,�..r.� . t� .,• q 9 7 �/ j� ' ��:: � 3 �AKEL� Os ' ,� r ., `. � T�: �' � 5�1E� R ' -? � ✓oaey View Z ,� b ;,t� � _ '• �p� a e E 1 G H TS : CArisfion "�' - - �_ " � , CAurch 3 ' � `D '1 , Z - -_rR�,y�/.s - - H,L�� ,. �9�,� "�—� � � � -q ,: �a ',� ,. �A � o. � � w ;' �c, � t,, � � :�i�::4�:r�3:• .a C �. ,po; � S � �BDI � � • •�, •• .o DISTRICT LEGEND � ' I 9 �O ❑ r-� LIOXT INOYBT81Al � ` 11-t OMH FAYItY D1110'S p-Z TM10 P�YtLt OWO'8 0 Y-! NEAVI INDU9TRIAL � ' ':e . C N�! a 3 5 � 11-7 GlN. YULTIPLH DMO'8 � vuo PLANNEO UNIT DQY. � r` � A-� YOBILB MOYH P�RR � 6-1 MI/O6 VARII N810M80pN00D ❑ ��_ � VYBLIC FACIUTIHB � S-7 NHOlYlLOVYBNT DIBTRICT � r \ , C-1 LOCAL SU61NE88 � p-t CRBflK i RIVER PRE9HRYATtON � '� ' � C-f O8N[RAL BY81NH83 � O-7 CRITICAL ARLA � :z '� � C�� OLNBNA� 8M07VIN0 � /j 7 C-�11 08MlRAL ORRIC! ❑ YI1C11T8D STNEFTB i..l e • � ti .. . . ZONING IIIIAP� Forest Harstad . ' P.S. �94-04; SAV �94-02; ZOA ��94-02 —�---�- a o- .�� Z� W �� g w p Z C7 t �%f WB;� � �� < � �s a � �� n' 3py�� =a� g�n �� °��q�� e SITE PLAN � �f;::«�;<�.�; � I ��`'��`�J`;';.:: , Ir:'<"'`-;�;'��%'��"'`�'; �:: ' �'�� •l\�II►�«i►o�I!1: • s � iaa.�y a�� .uc � I � 1 � '`g CO a.. � -f� � � � �� J r —a-�—� � � I � ---�-��«»aa: � ' . ; �� . '�. :;�' . �� - :1 i�4S �ll�d (/ �O i � � � Forest Harstad s� P.S. �94-04; SAV �94-02; ZOA 4�94-02 y� !� e• i #� � . <: � � i�� nj �f �� j' � � � � ! ~ �; � �� n �s9f� �� } � � �h3 _ � • � � yi,,,v_oc � �-1y �o � � ' `. ; .��... ,� f �—`�.I J � � �; � ,: Y �.n �^ o n � < __ D= � ��`� 8 �y T. g �O i°. „ �� c � 1 �?I�� i �E�� x � �s� d�b awr�� .t � �g��_r� >.a �g �:g�� §", t� AREA TO BE VACATED I � iaa � O �� ' J II 1 �� 1 �e ! � � � O J @lo"� V '�o �� 1�4S �tlod � i i i � � � Forest Harstad T P.S. 4�94-04; SAV �94-02; ZOA �94e02 ' p� � d+ � �' E � . ^ 1 � � � L /� Q c a �� 9 �; � * 1 F d� ` � � ��;� �1 �, �� ` � = E �� as�� } �� ' _ ;�: ► �C• �:,._ . : � � -�-+ ++ `� � � � ��0 < h � n= � c�' s N �g � r i� � � �.� � �t 4� i 3�23� � �i��f � ��a�� a�x�� h �� t� ��a ��r t: �I��,: � EXISTING PLAT I 1 C 0 s• Forest Harstad P.S. �94-04; SAV �94-02; ZOA �94-02 �� a� �� i a� ��j; �!� �/Sw�� 1 �� 3 _- S � � o �� • a= � �s' ^ N �� v � � � f ��'; I � ��_�� M�h aw�� ;t. ��s �I��$�� r� PROPOSED PLAT ► Forest Harstad . ° P.S. �94-04; SAV �94-02; ZOA �94-02 �� I��' }aaa}S a�owll!� a o. 9 � o �� o � 0 < n g 3t n � � �° �F �� $ ' �iP�� ,9 1�� i��j� ; j��iD� ��x�� Y�b D�� °x �� x� � � ' ontrol Plan � Grad�ng & Eros�on C , e , Forest Harstad - P.S. �94-04; SAV �94-02; ZOA �94-02 � �� i i 1 �� ----- ---- a� � 5 ��x�� d h awr�� °� ��8 �I��ue Utility Plan !. i ;aa��g a�oW��i� � � � r • � . � _� ;ae��S �Iod r+•. �� I � � a � � .a .. �� _ , I ._. � , -- , ;$ �� ` b [ 1 S • . � � , y�� ,-�, . ; -� _; - ,, �9 � Forest Harstad � P.S. �94-04; SAQ �94-02; ZOA �94r02 � . 1�� ..,. �� e �r � � �8 �/ �8 8� � � 16 8� ,� � _� � � �� :� �� g �� i ��x�� $ d a °��. �� s �� e Landscape Plan� .. , � Forest Harstad P.S. 4�94-04; SAV �94-02; ZOA �94-02 i ; � 1 � ��x � g r�a �w�� tb _�� -�e�i�� ; Wetland Delineation' N � v d y�-� 0� ` � °' o �, .0 C o � c O � � O H � � �� O V C C y �� F•• a E � a. O � � �a � ;� a a� � � a v � W � �� e o �a � � �� ... F„ �a � c. Q � w � � � z U O a � � d N N � N z � M Vl � M � c o o c Z e .� � N .� z o� o �t; v� � 0 00 0 � o . -� - - � O �t M O ,--� .� O� N O � � o � o `° ° � .� ~ .. � � � � ,'�,., d�' ^ M o a a� o � o ., u r., �, �, .� �-' ;ti � � .� � x on a 3 � � � �' �� > �+ w d °�' v� `� � °o x v� o > a °� ,� � U � .� a � o .� � � �� U a� W � w° a� �`.' a" A" o" ec � S � a � o � .� � U f� d . � � ,� �'-�