1i. Wetland alternation 7570 Dogwood Rd. C I T T O F PC DATE: June 3, 1992'
1 \ \, . C UA1HAEI
CC DATE: June 22, 1992
CASE #: 92 -7 WAP
1 By: Aanenson:v
1
STAFF REPORT
1
1 PROPOSAL: Wetland Alteration Permit for Installation of a Dock Through a Class
A Wetland
I
4 LOCATION: 7570 Dogwood Road -Lot 2, Block 1 of Zimmerman Farm Subdivision,
1 0 North of Crimson Bay and Highway 5, and South of Tanadoona Road
J
I a a _ APPLICANT: Peter Brandt
4 7570 Dogwood Road
Q Excelsior, MN 55331
1
ll klai by Ctty Administrator
PRESENT ZONING: RR, Rural Residential ��i
I ACREAGE: 10.1 acres Itod d` ItOctErt
Deo b - / k - 9-L
DENSITY: /re Submitted to Commission'
1 ADJACENT ZONING AND ` sutxnitted to council
LAND USE: N - RR; Rural Residential b 2-2.--92..__
I S - RR; Rural Residential
Q E - RR; Rural Residential
I W - RD; Recreational Development, Lake Minnewashta
R
Q WATER AND SEWER: Not available to the site.
II W
1-- PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The site has a lot of trees along the western portion of the
I property. The lot slopes toward the lake at a grade of
approximately 15 %. The wetland is adjacent to the lake. f
1 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Large Lot Residential
1
Brandt WAP
June 3, 1992
1 Page 2
1 PROPOSAL
The applicant is proposing to construct a dock which is within 200 feet of a Class A wetland
1 which requires a wetland alteration permit. This wetland abuts Lake Minnewashta. The
proposed dock /boardwalk would cross a Class A wetland and therefore, also requires a
wetland alteration permit.
One of the conditions of approval for the Zimmerman Subdivision states that "any access,
pp y cces ,
' including a dock or boardwalk, to Lake Minnewashta from Lot 2, Block 1 would require a
wetland alteration permit, as would any dredging or removal of vegetation in the area of the
shoreline."
This wetland is part of the same wetland which was part of the Crimson Bay subdivision.
It is a Class A wetland which should be protected from alteration. In the past, the city has
' not allowed a dock to go through a wetland and has instead required boardwalks be located
above the wetland vegetation. The wetland within the Crimson Bay Subdivision was
delineated by the 944.5' elevation, or the ordinary high water level. On the subject site, this
' elevation falls approximately on the edge of the lake. The wetland vegetation extends
approximately 30 feet into the lake.
The dock /boardwalk will be located 89 feet from the eastern property line. The
dock /boardwalk will cross approximately 32 of ground cover (grass) and then extend 56 feet
into the water. The Boats and Waterways Ordinance allows for docks to extend to a
maximum of 50 feet of the minimum straight -line distance necessary to reach a water depth
of four (4) feet. The dock will be 4 feet wide. No excavation or embankment is necessary
for the installation of the dock /boardwalk and it will not permanently impact the wetland.
The dock /boardwalk will sit on the ground (grass) abutting the wetland vegetation in the
lake but will be raised to a minimum of one foot above the surface of the water. Currently,
1 there is limited wetland vegetation at the proposed location of the dock. The dock will
extend out past the limits of the wetland vegetation so that the wetland will not be impacted
by the docking of boats.
Staff is recommending approval of the proposed wetland alteration permit. The proposed
pp p p p e p oposed
dock /boardwalk will result in minimal impact to the wetland during its construction and no
1 impact to the wetland once it has been installed.
' In the past when wetland alteration permits have been approved for docks /boardwalks, the
conditions have been met during installation but over time the vegetation is altered because
a manicured lawn has been developed. Because the size of the wetland increases as it
moves to the south in the Crimson Bay subdivision, staff is recommending that the ground
cover abutting the lake not be disturbed in order to protect the value of the wetland.
1
1
,1
Brandt WAP 1
June 3, 1992
Page 4
1
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion:
"The Planning Commission recommends approval of Wetland Alteration Permit #92 -7 to allow
construction within 200 feet of a Class A wetland and the installation of a dock through a Class
A wetland with the following conditions:
1
1. The ground cover abutting the Class A wetland not be disturbed and it shall be left in its
natural state. 1
2. The dock cannot be installed during waterfowl breeding season and shall be located as
to minimize the impact on vegetation.
1
3. There shall be no filling or dredging permitted within the Class A wetlands.
4. The dock shall be raised a minimum of one foot above the O.H.W. 944.5' level through
g
the wetland."
PLANNING OMMI SION UPDATE
C S
On June 3, 1992, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Wetland Alteration Permit 1
#92 -7 for Donna and Peter Brandt. The Planning Commission was concerned that staff
periodically review these permits to ensure that the conditions of approval are being met. The
Planning Commission made the periodic review of these permits a condition of approval. The
Planning Commission eliminated condition number three (3) since there will be no filling or
dredging of the wetland. The Commision also wanted a condition added that the wetland be left
in its natural state.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: 1
"The City Council recommends approval of Wetland Alteration Permit #92 -7 to allow
construction within 200 feet of a Class A wetland and the installation of a dock through a Class
A wetland with the following conditions:
1. The ground cover abutting the Class A wetland not be disturbed and it shall be left in its
1
natural state.
1
1
1
I Brandt WAP
June 3, 1992
1 Page 5
2. The dock cannot be installed during waterfowl breeding season and shall be located as
1 to minimize the impact on vegetation.
•
I 3. The dock shall be raised a minimum of one foot above the O.H.W. 944.5' level through
g
the wetland.
I 4. Upon completion, the applicant will notify staff so that conditions of approval can
be reviewed.
I 5. The Class A wetland will be left in its natural state."
1 ATTACHMENTS
1. Application and plans dated May 15, 1992.
1 2. Plat of Zimmerman Farms.
3. Letter to the applicant dated June 22, 1990.
4. Planning Commission minutes dated June 3, 1992.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
II
WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT
EVALUATION WORKSHEET 1
To Be Completed By Applicant and Submitted with Application
(Attach additional sheets if necessary) '
1. WETLAND DESCRIPTION
Size: APP2a. 4500 5 -F. 1
Class: 5— f Type:
Location: Lakeside Streamside Upland 1
Watershed District: /741/01e4g,L/—
Area of Open Water: an/..4L
Drainage Flows To:
Vegetation Types: a;r4:t-.7
Soil Types: C e‹.7_
2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ALTERATION: 7„:,e‹.1
1
3. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED ALTERATION: /4--/tc
8
i
4. APPLICABLE WETLAND ORDINANCE SECTION: .0 - Z/ (S) 1
1
5. A. DISCUSS THE IMPACTS ON THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IF NO
ALTERATION IS MADE:
1
5. B. IDENTIFY AND DISCUSS OTHER ALTERNATIVES TO WETLAND
ALTERATION:
1
C. IDENTIFY THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF THE PROPOSED
ALTERATION:
6. USING THE WETLAND ORDINANCE STANDARDS AS A GUIDE, DETERMINE
WHETHER THERE ARE ANY INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN THE ORDINANCE
AND PROPOSED ALTERATION: /7-/ -
1
1
1
' -2-
1
• CITy o
i LIAM., ti
A ■-■,-,
1' 1 :`•• ..'1,'Ir
SCALE - FEET 4", zz-,- ,..... , ,,,_ v
1
4.r.,
0 50' i co- k4(' 1
1 t ■ C 'Or:
v iiic
. 392 Fi terA CHANHAZ
.4 EN PLAN NING DEPT 1
14/V37).1PITC12- '
4----P,
Atom
gooty epag o f .pocx 6 4 W ) DE
CP CTE vokla * I - si 6Cal or '5 ( I ) Fga EP e' v N I 4. I t ) ° I
a F
fgbietrf
1
1
1
-::•:::::::.: , ,..,.... . ..... .:‘,,...:- ....„.. - • . ,.....-......,...,..,;,..• • ....- s,..• ...f / ,..
I
. ...- te " , " , 1
...."'"... ,......"' `'' • , , O. o e • ......* ....
•••••"" -- • ...... tA r: ". vv .° ( , , ..., r" •`' ' * . •• "*".•
rC
••'''' ' 1 /..". ..• .."... 7 . / ./... Se. ..** 1 1 I
e e•••:' ., tn
„ /"
0/•••"'..— ..,"?.. , .1 .... d e:P'' . .,.,. /.... .".. ,. / .... ..,•". . .1
/ /
...• •.••••• *" ., _ .. •••". 4. ../.• ; 4' . / ../` ...:^• ,4 i l e
„1---^' .. / / ..4" / / /
......
.....V .../ /sr' / i
/ /
.44 ....• .- . i ....." ...., ..,/ ...." ,.."
.......•
se,' • •
l , , 4
4.......4........
. A.**. /**. et • • •• K / / / • , , " s
....."^"' ,
......•••' i'
• 1 ../. /..." " / I
••••- -*
. -.s• - • ..r...'.. 0 •• . • " / / ....0
/ .."*" ../... ...`'. /
• •• 4 * ' • ••`.. -.• 1 ••••'.. 4. .2'.' •• ............ , ....... ..
...•05A'4..'. ••'`. .1:" .•:•" ., ' .., / " ..."
..,••••""
r •
I•!.. •••••• i
■ •• 14 es" ....- N / ,./.. /
".
../'
..0 N7 •■•• 1 1
....
,..." 0) ..... ...... .../ ......, ./.." ' 4)
,o•
1
. \
". r .., ..... / %,,:me Z A . ,
.......,-- ....- ....-- -- ...„ ..", ../. 40 ..' 3'N. • in
..., ...., ,./ No ..."
. , • * ,.
..............-- •1.0::"" ..•
..... ...--------- --.....„-----__ 1
,---- .t, ,.• . 32/ ........----,......-
. c>oe y , . ,
. er.145 ,
z. •• ....------,------ -.....„............„.........._
. • . • -• ....k..._ ...-------;=-----
... .4. • ......,............„.........,
..... ... , . ........-- • •
....--- - ---- 1 6 (,) ' .........
1 1 /
H. W. L. 944.5 1
/
, LAKE
y,poQDT boC,L.
M.INNEWASHTA 1
I
C I TY 0 F
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612)937 FAX(612)937
June 22, 1990
' Mr. and Mrs. Peter Brandt
5200 Beacon Hill Road
Minnetonka, MN 55345
' Dear Mr. and Mrs. Brandt:
This letter is to confirm that on June 4, 1990, the City Council
' approved the final plat ( #89 -11) for Zimmerman Farm as shown on the
final plat dated May 21,''1990, with the following conditions:
' 1. The City shall officially map the road alignment as
illustrated by Exhibit 2 of the Sr. Engineering Technician
memo dated April 4, 1990.
2. Erosion control shall be Type II.
3. The applicant shall receive and comply with any necessary
permits from the Watershed District and Department of Natural
Resources.
' 4. The two approved septic sites on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1,
Zimmerman Farm shall be staked and preserved.
' 5. Any access, including a dock or boardwalk, to Lake Minnewashta
from Lot 2, Block 1 would require a wetland alteration permit
as would any dredging or removal of vegetation in the area of
the shoreline.
II s 6. Construction plans and specifications for the temporary
• turnaround shall ,ire submitted to the City Engineer for
approval. The turnaround shall be built in accordance with
Alternative No. 2 shown on Plan B to the City's rural road
design (7 ton). The grade for the turnaround should be
reduced to 3 %. The turnaround section shall be maintained at
' all times to the 7 ton standard with a minimum of 17 inches of
crushed rock.
' 7. The applicant shall extend the description of the trail
easement westerly 25 feet to be continuous with the extension
of Crimson Bay Road.
1
.II
Mr. and Mrs. Brandt
June 22, 1990
Page 2
8. The applicant shal. enter into a development contract and
provide the necessary financial security to assure the proper
installation of the improvements.
Two mylar copies of the plat should be submitted to the City for •
signatures. Should you have any questions, please feel free to
contact me. 1
Si cerely,
#
Paul Krauss, AICP
Director of Planning 1
PK:/
cc: Building Dept. 1
Engineering Dept.
Jeremy S. Steiner
Kurt Laughinghouse
Harold Peterson, James R. Hill Assoc.
1
1
1
' 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
- ' /1/,/,',/<"/ ,// ,/
- '.. / ' • - ., ---------. '`'N-S.
•0,,/,' / • f)r- •-•-•-..
.,.
I ,
zinlryl-erinan • , -4,„,,,,,, ,,,,/, . , •„, , „ / „.
, ,,,,, //„,,,,/, r ,,,,•,:, / , , • i„ , , ...... ..,„,
, , , "," :,,,,,: ,,,,/ ic , , • . , , . / / .,,••••• - •.,., , ",,„• "-
Farm S .,,,,,, , , / Li.p — •
• , .›; ... y
, - • t \
1
„ , / ,---.....&, ,„ ,,,
. f .,.. , -....-..,
,. , f yf.; . I/ f i t•- ., ; i , i 1 ' i i,
e I h/ It
1 7 or „7
-1-
. , . .
; I, i - , • ' , t,/ , , 4 , - , • f : f ' / -
_ __ , „.-•,,,,
r. ; / !,711f r i y • , ; . ' , ,.?,' i N.
, _.....,........,..„.
j ; ''
1 i- irt' •
ri-1 CO ,, , 7 .1•=
- ,•,. irrf-rir r • 3 I.. „. `',
i 1 j'il i 1 f f i i i : . : — 1 1CO . 1. 2 . :••
; , i , . . • :f • k • 's !"- • ', ; 1 ''''' `'• \
rs 'ss,
1 ‘‘,
!
7. • •
-
1 i f i i 1 : 1- ! r i I- • i in d ,* '' ; I I I
.. i ! , := i - • - -1 ! k -
• ! . i i f Q , • (NI
.,/ 0.14
„,
•: , ' - r ' • i .,__, ,• 'I ( j i irvil, \
---- •
1 , ;
- --f---- -i-- --;-__ - 40 . •-v , - :
i .H II , .
r li ili 11‘; . i--•''! I .,.. 0 1
cv •
' iii` i . - • ' : Li : ' ; " Lit 1 'C „ ,--'• i •.' ' .,
,,,
, . ; ; • t•r •t.ift 1 1 I r ' 1 1 i J • i t i •
;;— i ,6 ••
l! ' ' ; • t tr ii • i • I r tt t . 4 1 • ' I . , - ,'
, , • I , , ‘ • • ! ! I 1 ; , i• 1 , , , - ; ■ . ; .-
, V -
• , . , ■ . w, ! .t.J k ;•, , : ; ; -.:-
• 0 ,-
1 , • ' , ' A , ' • • • i , , I i ' ; ' - 4- • I C j /
hr t r ' k ; :-L...:1_-. ' •411. ' • . ', -i-
.t: ,•• 0 ■ , ; rr— ,k
t. ' ‘ \ 1 \I t•‘'t , !E \ ‘ 41-- . ' t. ..1.,..,,,,,7".
rt .
, , , •
#.15
',, \ .. ' . ■ , CD ,„...,'''''
‘'.1 \ ' ', • 1‘Th ' . ' , ' \ - , • • , . t \.
, ‘ -
t • 0 r•-■ ..m--.•-••-• ...,.., t
,.... ,,,...-.
' • ' , 0.4 s Lij . ', \ ." \ ILA . , . , ' t ,
i
7
I ., . , Cf , \ ,. n 't - \ .'" • ' \ \ - . - :A • 1 1 \ lakt 0
'
., - , ‘, ' : \ 1 ....ir '3,, • k. \ \ (
't- \ ,. •
. ,,, t . • ,
,, ..,,, \ ; ‘ , , ; : s c v, 4. • : ".., ‘. s
I , ,
\ , •s- • -•\\:\ \ ... . , \ 43,, ,, \ \ , \ \ . 1, , ‘ -
'',\.•'\‘`, s - •" : \ ' • \\\\1\‘ k \ le , : . •
i I
\ k k : 1 , \ 1, -
• ' \ % \ \ '
I A
_ s• ss \ \ ,„ k ; ; ' , '1 _,, .. ; \ ' 1 i
s k s;,' ' ' ', •: ; ,r t:i \ ' ' s s \yo).8,4 \ k \ ' to 0 sv. ;
• tt \ ' 9 ' ' ' ' (
s \‘, s, ss , , ,
‘‘, ' - -, , \ ; ' s • • \\ s"" \s' 7 ' \ r`r• *r t , ', ; r, 1
• / f
f
1 i
4,r \ • " ' , • - ' ‘ \ ' s
• ' ... :.. ..' •,-,
8, - '3- • .:\ - •' • •, s,
I \ l , , I L y ,.. \\ \ •„ .,\:\ : : t -. Nigik
‘.\‘''''''\\ \\\* ‘tN.N ' ,J ' "\ \ s -,.., \ •, • \
„ .
- • \\ \ \ „ \\ ,,, . ' \ •- ' ''': ''\- \ \ \\ ' \ ' ' \ . ' 1
I \ „.. -1s \ \ '' ''\. \ \ N \ ,,,:„..,.''......: lit •''' ''',, ' k , 's , , ,,,‘-‘ , •'-'- s- • , •‘-` „, '
>, \ : \ \\- ,' •\.: '\•'•'\.. ••■.,,..), --,,s,.\.., , ' '., , s k. ‘„ T, s, \ k,.. , '‘,. ,
I ' , ' \- s• \ • '''`, ,.,„ '''', •' -N k, ',',\‘'.,\\‘\‘' ‘ 2 , ,, , ‘',,. .k.„7
I \
\\ t e t
,‘ ,‘' ,. ..„, •.. ,.
' •.' ;"",, " '" 7: ::: ' ''-‘ N 114, ' :: , '' ' • ‘'‘, '• • `.. . -
' ' ' '.\N \ N:i... • , ,' \\N N, -,
. 1 ,.■ \ \:::-. \\,, • ,,-
944 5
_, \ \ . ` > \ 's .s • ''' ' ,
50 !..‘ i
-- , t --1 . !•'' 't • , ., . • ,, ,,, , \ .00 k , ,,, ., --„,8,,
ii ) ' „
\s . ,. \ \ •,::\, \ ,: \ :,\ \ , \ „\ \ \ ,\„ \ \:,1 \ 2" , x(. 9\ '..\,.>„:\\,.",
1 .
; , , \1_ . :-\ \ ,-.•
, i ,....
)E-
1111 ,/'
.c.: ,1"....-1. .,.
. . „
I . .
v
/ / ,:, LI
1
V -
„.,
■ ‹t: 1
....c. _J I
I
(/
e_
I I
II
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 3, 1992
Vice Chair Ahrens called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Ladd Conrad, Steve Emmings, Matt Ledvina and
Joan Ahrens
MEMBERS ABSENT: Brian Batzli and Jeff Farmakes
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director; Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner I4
Kate Aanenson, Planner II; Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician; and To
Scott, City Attorney
PUBLIC HEARING:
WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR A WETLAND ALTERATION FOR THE PLACEMENT OF A
DOCK THROUGH A CLASS A WETLAND ON PROPERTY ZONED RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL AND 1
LOCATED AT 7570 DOGWOOD ROAD, PETER AND DEANNA BRANDT.
Public Present: 1
Name Address
Peter Brandt 7570 Dogwood Road
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. 1
Ahrens: Kate, on your first three conditions. Who monitors that and how
often is that monitored?
Aanenson: As far as the?
Ahrens: Or I guess the first two. I'm sorry, 1 and 3. 1
Aanenson: When we've passed basically, it's my understanding that we
passed the water fowl breeding season now and so that's my understanding II
they want to put that in shortly so that wouldn't be a concern at this
point. I guess we would ask that they, we would advise them of when that
time is. We do know what those dates are and I believe that's June
something Dave. End of the water fowl breeding season.
Hempel: According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife, June 15th.
Aanenson: Okay. So we would advise them not to put it in until after that'
date. I guess it's a complaint basis sort of thing too.
Ahrens: I mean, how about numbers 1 and 3? Who checks to make sure that 1
this wetland is not going to be disturbed after the dock is put in?
Krauss: I think you're raising a real good point. These things do not 1
require a building permit as does normal construction. And your raising
the point tonight points out that we have been responding to these things
on a case by case basis. We have typically. not had a program of going out II
periodically to check them. We certainly should be doing that the first
1
I Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 2
II
year with the construction. If you'd like to make, add a condition saying
Y '
Y Y g
that the applicant shall notify staff upon installation so that it can be
II reviewed and signed off on, I think that would be appropriate.
Ahrens: Couldn't you just go out maybe 3 months from now or on a periodic
I basis and check it?
Krauss: Well yes, sure.
1 Ahrens: I mean we have a lot of conditions it seems like that say that
wetlands aren't going to be altered and who's knows if they ever are.
I Krauss: Most of the times though that you see those conditions, they're
associated with a larger development where you do have on site inspection
and follow up. Either through our staff's engineering department or for
II the building department. This is kind of an unusual case.
Ahrens: Would the applicant like to address the commission? This is a
I public hearing. Anybody.
Conrad moved, Erhart seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
II Erhart: Just to follow up on your suggestion. What did you mean by
periodic inspection Joan? Continuous or just after construction?
II Ahrens: Well I don't have a real definite idea of what I mean by periodic
inspections. Just that we see a lot of wetland alteration permits come
through here and my experience, particularly in the development I live in
II is that the city doesn't go back out and make sure that people aren't
altering wetlands unless there's a complaint made by somebody who lives
around it.
1 Erhart: Well I guess that gets into the basic philosophy is if we want to
have your government, you want them actively going out and looking over
I this and all the other things or do we want to respond by complaint. I
think our philosophy has been to respond by complaint because for one thing
I'm not sure it's practical to go out and inspect every project.
I Ahrens: Well we're trying right now to track all the wetlands it seems
like in Chanhassen. Hasn't there been an intensive effort to do that?
I Krauss: You're both correct but there is an administrative problem.
Clearly we have an obligation to make sure that the conditions are adhered
to when the thing's initially installed and constructed. Periodic checking
of, we don't even know how many wetlands we have in the city. It's
I someplace between 300 and 400 and how many docks we might have in the city,
that's simply beyond the ability of our staff to do it so we've been
relying on a complaint basis. Or we do have our building inspectors are
I out in the neighborhoods constantly and they report back problems and we
respond to those problems.
I Erhart: Okay, well anyway beyond that. I assume then it's consistent with
the requirements we imposed on the development next door?
II
Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 3
1
Aanenson: Yeah but as I pointed out, there was a significant larger span
of wetlands, the depth of that from the 925. '
Erhart: Yeah but essentially we're requiring the same thing.
Aanenson: Exactly. The same conditions. ,
Erhart: Why did we go from, what's the difference between the dock and an
elevated boardwalk. Or wasn't I supposed to ask?
Krauss: Jo Ann knows and she's not here.
Aanenson: It's really kind of one and the same. The intent is to keep it II
above the vegetation so it allows the vegetation to grow. Whether you call
it a dock or.
Erhart: I know we discussed this the last time when we did that But '
anyway, I guess an elevated boardwalk is what we're talking about here and
perhaps must be acceptable. Other than that I think it looks okay. No 11 other comments.
Conrad: I would attach just a condition that says, and I think it should
happen with all permits. I don't know how we monitor it downstream in
years but I do think that after a permit is issued, like a building
inspector should go out and take a look. And so I just wrote, staff
review upon completion of the project should occur. And I think that's
just real reasonable and I don't think I want to single this project out. I'
really would like to be doing that for everyone so staff, if that makes
sense in the future, I sure would like that and I'd like to attach it to 11
this. Otherwise I think everything looks good.
Ledvina: The boardwalk, that's a permanent installation?
Aanenson: No. It's a seasonal dock. It will come out. But the intent is
to just have it raised. That's why it's called a boardwalk. It's not on
grade. '
Emmings: It's a high dock.
Ledvina: Okay. So every year they're going to be going back in and
they're going to be putting it in and taking it out? I don't know. I see
that, there's going to be a lot of traffic in the wetland and I don't see
that as a good thing for the wetland. '
Aanenson: The area that they're putting it in right now, their dogs. I
walked the site. The dogs have been swimming down there. There's kind of
a cleared, slightly cleared area right now and as I stated before, I'm not
sure that all the posts will be coming out. Maybe you might want to make
that part of the recommendation.
Ledvina: That the posts be set on a permanent basis?
Aanenson: Yeah, or something like that.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 4
1
Ledvina: Well I don't know. I don't know what's best for the wetland in
terms of the least disruptive activity that would occur down there. If you
feel that that would help the situation.
Aanenson: Yeah, this is how Crimson's Bay doing their's.
11 Krauss: I guess I have a question for the city engineer. In the past I've
seen a number of the installations where the boardwalk section I think
' stays there all winter and it's just the dock that comes in and out. The
one we had on Lotus Lake was built that way.
' Hempel: That's correct Paul. I think the freeze /thaw, the ice out
condition will do damage to the docks that are out in the water themselves
but back in the wetlands they are protected from froze heave or ice heaves.
' Ledvina: So then in the wetland area, that will be a permanent
installation then right? Semi - permanent.
Hempel: Semi - permanent, yeah. I believe that's how they are on the Lotus
Lake.
Emmings: Isn't most of this wetland in the lake?
' Aanenson: That's what I was going to say. All the wetland in this
situation is in the lake. It's all grass.
' Emmings: It's below the, where the water meets the land. It's to the lake
side of where the water's meeting the land. This wetland. But I think on
Crimson Bay we did not require any permanent installation through the
wetland according to the same reasons.
Aanenson: Yep.
Emmings: There was talk at that time too I remember. There has been other
times of what it would mean to leave permanent posts in these areas where
you've got docks there and where you've got snowmobile traffic in the
winter time. So I don't know. I can't think of one where we've require
permanent installation and I'm not sure it would be a good idea without
' looking at it and maybe having your engineer look at it.
Ledvina: I think that's reasonable. I just had a question as to what's
physically going to happen there. What are we permitting over the long
term for this wetland? Okay, that seems reasonable.
Ahrens: It does sound like a good idea and maybe in the future for
' wetlands that aren't submerged in water to include that as a condition.
Ledvina: Ladd mentioned the review of the project upon completion. One
other thing that Paul mentioned I think that could also be added would be
the notification. The applicant shall notify City staff as to when the
dock installation will occur to enable inspection. I think that gives the
city the opportunity to go out and take a look at what's happening as well
1 as follow up once it's completed. So I think that would be helpful as
well. That's it.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 5
1
Emmings: I agree with Matt's last point here. The way to do it is to have
the applicant notify staff. I think that's the way that condition ought t�
be worded. And number 3. There should be no filling or dredging
permitted. I think there ought to be a period right there and we ought to
strike the rest of that sentence. They're not asking to do any filling or
dredging anywhere are they? Well let's just make that real blunt then.
The only other thing that occurred to me is condition 1 says that the
ground cover abutting the wetland won't be disturbed. We're talking about
a 1 inch strip or a 1 foot strip or a 10 foot strip. I don't know if they'
can read this and know what you mean.
Aanenson: Okay, it's about 15 feet and I met with the Brandt's out on the,
Mrs. Brandt out on the property. What the concern is we want it left in a II
natural state because it is abutting the wetland and in the past when we
haven't addressed this, maybe over the next 2 years they'll end up moving
it and then we're back to the situation where we don't have that butter
against the wetlands.
Emmings: But the condition doesn't tell them what you mean in terms of the"
depth of that strip and I don't know what would be reasonable there but.
Aanenson: I can extrapolate that from the contours of the, it's about 15
feet. '
Emmings: Does it follow a certain contour?
Aanenson: Yes. 1
Emmings: Do you know what that contour is so we could just put it in right
now? Well, why don't you put that in between now and City Council. I
don't have anything else.
Ahrens: I agree with the comments made by everybody so far and I don't
have anything further on this. Can I have a motion?
Conrad: I just have one comment. We're assuming the wetland can't be
tampered with basically. What we're trying to do is keep the barrier there!
for whatever reason. That's assumed. And is that assumed based on our,
DNR requirement? Assumed based on an ordinance that we have?
Aanenson: Yes. What we're trying to do is get the dock out past the
wetlands so it will just be over the top of the wetland and then all the
docking and stuff will occur past the edge of that wetland fringe. So
there will be minimum disturbance of the wetland.
Conrad: The idea is really not to tamper with the wetland. Let the dock
go through and keep the thing there. The first point, the ground cover
abutting the Class A wetland not be disturbed and shall be left it's
natural state. We really want that to apply to the Class A wetland itself
too don't we? Ground cover is insignificant compared to the wetland. '
Insignificant.
Emmings: Ladd, isn't what's going on here,.the general rule is, you can't II
touch a wetland unless you get a wetland alteration permit. Now they've
Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 6
1
come in here with their permit. Here are the conditions and sort of what
I hear you saying is, you want to restate the general rule as a condition,
which I don't think you need to do.
Conrad: I just want to make, yeah. Other than the fact that the applicant
will know what the general rule is.
Emmings: Well he knows because he knows he had to come in and get this.
1 Ahrens: It may be assuming too much though. I think it's never a bad idea
to restate something that is very important.
Emmings: Alright.
Ahrens: I think that's a good idea.
' Conrad: The Planning Commission, I recommend the Planning Commission
recommends approval of the Wetland Alteration Permit #92 -7 to allow
' construction within 200 feet of a Class A wetland and installation of a
dock through a Class A wetland with the conditions listed by staff. Adding
point number 5, that the applicant will notify the staff for review upon
completion of the project and that point number 6. The Class A wetland
' will be allowed to return, the Class A wetland will be maintained in it's
natural state.
' Ahrens: Maintaining implies though that they're going to be doing
something to it.
' Conrad: Is there a better word?
Ahrens: It should be left.
' Conrad: Will be left in it's natural state?
Erhart: I'll second that.
Conrad moved, Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Wetland Alteration Permit #92 -7 to allow construction within
200 feet of a Class A wetland and the installation of a dock through a
1
Class A wetland with the following conditions:
1. The ground cover abutting the Class A wetland not be distrubed and it
' shall be left in its natural state.
2. The dock cannot be installed during waterfowl breeding season and shall
be located as to minimize the impact on vegetation.
3. There shall be no filling or dredging permitted.
4. The dock shall be raised a minimum of one foot above the OHW 944.5'
level through the wetland.
' 5_ The applicant will notify the staff for review upon completion of the
project.
Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 7
r
6. The Class A wetland will be left in it's natural state.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. '
PUBLIC HEARING: II NON - CONFORMING USE PERMIT FOR A RECREATIONAL BEACHLOT FOR PLEASANT ACRES
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
Public Present: , II
Name Address
Pete Warhol 3831 Leslee Curve
Don Bulen 3871 Leslee Curve
Steven Erickson 3850 Leslee Curve
Jerry Johnson 3940 Glendale Drive
Steve Knigge 3910 Glendale Drive
Chuck Hultner 3900 Leslee Curve
Bob Hebeisen 3607 Ironwood
Tom Merz 3201 Dartmouth
Mark Rogers, Pres. 3951 Leslee Curve
Pleasant Acres Homeowners Assn. '
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this issue.
Ahrens: So if I can summarize here, what's different is the size of the
dock, the number of the boats at the dock and the 7 power lifts?
Aanenson: Yep. '
Ahrens: Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here who would
like to speak? If you'd step up to the microphone here and give your name II
and address.
Mark Rogers: My name is Mark Rogers. I live at 3851 Leslee Curve and a II resident of Pleasant Acres since 1986. I'll try and be brief. I know you
are familiar now with who we are and so forth. A couple of corrections.
One, our subdivision was not done in 1984 as Kate just said. It's 1954.
Ahrens: No, it says 1954 in our report.
Mark Rogers: She did just state 1984. I just wanted to make sure. '
Ahrens: It's right in our report. '
Mark Rogers: Okay, fine. Just making clear here. And before I start, I'd'
just like to again say that our beachlot has always been in very good
condition as maintained by our neighbors. Stated by our neighbors and the
city surveys and to my knowledge we have no outstanding complains by II neighbors or other residents of the area and since I've been there I have
known of none. Okay, that said. A couple of items. First, Kate you had
asked me for the Deed and Articles of Incorporation because you were unsure!'
of the date. We were incorporated in 1968 and I have other copies of the
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PROPOSED WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT
1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold
' a public hearing on Wednesday, June 3, 1992, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers in
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 Coulter Drive. The purpose of this hearing is to consider the
application of Peter and Deanna Brandt for a wetland alteration permit for the placement
1 of a dock through a Class A wetland on property zoned RR, Rural Residential and located
at 7570 Dogwood Road.
1 A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review at City Hall
during regular business hours.
1 All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their
opinions with respect to this proposal.
1 Kathryn Aanenson, Senior Planner
Phone: 937 -1900
1 (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on May 21, 1992)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
• !
.4 v / e • , . 1
_., ..
.„.3,:t,
Ifili Pi.,,
0)/ -
L. AKE 1
M /NNEI
{' — L A K E —
F i r /
1
!t M/ N N E W A S H T A
1
r RD IREG /ONAL
� , PUD—R 4_ - - -- -- — —
R FA,A;
lh
r - •• PUD —R . i.,.: • , . , 7-• , ,..... -
,A7$ 4
_ _
___,„ I pp-, ,
-___1_, , ,• ' _ - , ,__________ _ .____ .
RR c
a3V i J` .
0G -
o /-%}___L �y r
V •
4:, .
»,
_
?5'10 C06 14,00a kcout I
c POND
! . --- , c i))10
NG hti A Y _
i - j
■
•
I -- - ' -- -^ ._
POND I
1 2
1
1[PtS OF THOMAS & J. KORDONOWY KENNTH H SHERMAN
CAMPFIRE GIRLS 3610 SO HWY 101 7460 HAZELTINE BLVD
1 40 EAST GRANT WAYZATA MN 55391 t EXCELSIOR MN 55331
INNEAPOLIS MN 55404 ,e
JEFFREY & L OBERMAN JOHN P SAVARYN CHARLES MARKERT
I 450 HAZELTINE BLVD ; C/O PAUL SAVARYN 7461 HAZELTINE BLVD
XCELSIOR MN 55331 11029 SAHLER STREET EXCELSIOR MN 55331
OMAHA NE 68164
ILLS PROPERTIES INC WALTER ZIMMERMAN MN HORTICULTURE
BOX 505 C/O CAROL SUMPTER ROOM 1 HORTICULTURE BL
IRAINERD MN 56401 15386 VILLAGE WOODS DR UNIVERSITY OF MN
EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 ST PAUL MN 55108
•ANIEL & K HERBST NICHOLAS & P DENNIS RONALD & L GESLIN
7640 CRIMSON BAY RD 8428 AMSDEN RIDGE CIR OR CURRENT RESIDENT
HANHASSEN MN 55317 BLOOMINGTON MN 55438 p 7311 DOGWOOD ROAD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
-K
°IVERSITY OF MN L MARTIN & D JONES JANET QUIST ET AL
REAL ESTATE OFFICE 7341 DOGWOOD 7331 DOGWOOD
1[ 35 MORRILL HALL EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331
00 CHURCH STREET SE
MPLS MN 55455 -0110
ICHARD C LUNDELL JOHN & J FOLEY BARBARA 0 FREEMAN
341 DOGWOOD 80 S INDIAN ROCKS ROAD 7431 DOGWOOD ROAD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331 BELLEAIR BLUFFS FL EXCELSIOR MN 55331
I 33540
-<
I(
ETSCH CORPORATION RAFAEL FERNANDEZ DAN HERBST
/0 EDWARD W GETSCH 7620 CRIMSON BAY RD 7640 CRIMSON BAY RD
550 DOGWOOD RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331
1 [XCELSIOR MN 55331 1
PETER & D BRANDT
117570 DOGWOOD RD
ArXCELSIOR MN 55331
•
1
I E �
1 • i
'