Loading...
1a. Wetland Alt Permit of Class A & B located on Lake Drive CITY O F P.C. DATE: March 21, 1990 � C.C. DATE: April 9, 1990 CHANHASSEN CASE NO: 90-1 WAP Prepared by: Olsen/v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Wetland Alteration to Class A and Class B Wetlands 3 LOCATION: Lake Drive East - 900 Feet East of Dakota/Lake Drive J East intersection L 1 APPLICANT: City of Chanhassen Acho;, by t.- PRESENT ZONING: BE .id IOP Fe d ACREAGE: a ° Re DENSITY: DE'-._.WV//O ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- BH/IOP; vacant Det _, — S- RSF; Chanhassen Estates Yl11,° E- IOP; DataSery • W- BH; McDonald' s awl i1 WATER AND SEWER: - PHYSICAL CHARAC. : 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Lake Drive East WAP March 21, 1990 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20-421 requires a wetland alteration permit for any digging, dredging or filling of a Class A or B wetland. Section 20-437 allows a minimum amount of filling of a wetland with the following considerations: 1. Any filling shall not cause total natural flood storage capacity of the wetland to fall below or fall below further the projected volume of runoff from the watershed generated by a 5.9" rainfall in 24 hours. Since the total amount of filling which can be permitted is limited apportionment of fill opportunities for other properties abutting the wetland shall be considered. 2 . Any filling shall not cause total nutrient stripping capacity of the wetland to be diminished to an extent that is detrimental to any area river, lake or stream. 3 . Only fill free of chemical pollutants and organic waste may be used. 4 . Filling shall be carried out so as to minimize the impact on vegetation. 5. Filling the wetland areas will not be permitted during waterfowl breeding or fish spawning season unless it is determined by the city that the wetland is not used for waterfowl breeding or fish spawning. ANALYSIS The City is proposing to improve Lake Drive East and existing utilities from the intersection of Dakota Avenue to 900 feet to the east (#1) . As a result of these improvements there will be some alterations to existing wetlands. There are two wetland areas that will be affected by the improvements to Lake Drive East. The wetlands are shown on the plans as Area A-West and Area B-East. Area A-West has a total of 14, 375 square feet. The wetland is located just west of the McDonald's site. The wetland contains Type II, III and VI wetlands. The proposed improvements will remove 2,625 square feet of wetland in Area A-West. Both Type II and Type VI wetlands will be impacted in the Area A-West wetland. Type II is a Class B wetland and Type VI is a Class A wetland. The remaining 88% of the wetland will not be impacted. Lake Drive East WAP March 21, 1990 Page 3 The Area B-East wetland has a total of 19,000 square feet. The Area B-East wetland contains Type II, III, V, VI and VII wetlands. Again, Type II wetland is a Class B and Types III through VIII are Class A wetlands. There is an existing drainage ditch through the Area B-East wetland which will be replaced with a storm sewer and the southern portion of the wetland will be impacted by the improvements to Lake Drive East. The total 19,000 square feet of the Area B-East wetland will be impacted by the roadway and utility improvements to Lake Drive East. The installation of the storm sewer will remove the surface ditch and remove the source of surface water for the Area B-East wetland. A total of 20, 625 square feet ( .47 acres) of wetland will be removed as a result of the improvements to Lake Drive East. In the past when the City has had to remove wetlands as a result of public improvements, the City has provided replacement of the wetlands. For example, when Lake Drive East near the Rosemount site was improved, it removed portions of a Class B wetland. The City replaced that wetland with the ponding area near Lake Susan Park and also off-site where a future ponding area will be developed on the Eckankar property as part of the West 78th Street Detachment Program. The subject site does not have any area on site for replacement of the wetland area. Staff has been keeping a tabulation of wetland replacement to use as a mitigation bank for future city projects that may impact wetlands. The ponding area that is being developed on the Eckankar site and is being designed to Fish and Wildlife Wetland Standards and has an excess of .9 acres of wetland over what was needed to replace the Lake Drive East wetland near the Rosemount site (#2) . Therefore, staff is recommending that the excess of .9 acres of wetland on the Eckankar property be used as mitigation for the current Lake Drive East improvements east of Dakota Avenue. Since some of the wetland that is being removed as part of this project has Class A qualities including Type VI and VII which are the wooded wetland areas, staff will be requiring a portion of the wetland area on the Eckankar property to be designed to take on the qualities of a shrub and wooded wetland. Staff feels that the wetland that will be provided on the Eckankar site, adequately replaces the wetlands being removed as part of the Lake Drive East improvements. NOTE: Using the wetland site on the Eckankar property as mitigation for this project will remove approximately if acre from our .9 acre surplus in the wetland mitigation bank. Lake Drive East WAP March 21, 1990 Page 4 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission recommended approval subject to staff' s conditions. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Wetland Alteration Permit #90-1 as shown on plans dated March 12, 1990, with the following conditions: 1. The type of wetlands that are being removed as part of the Lake Drive East improvements including Types II, III, V, VI and VII will be provided in an equal amount at the wetland site on the Eckankar property which is being developed as part of the West 78th Street Detachment Program. 2 . Type III erosion control shall be provided to protect unaltered wetland areas. ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter to Paul Burke dated March 6, 1990. 2. Letter from OSM dated February 21, 1990. 3 . Site plan dated March 14, 1990. 4 . Planning Commission minutes dated March 21, 1990. 7 L' • TRANSPORR A 1• igony URB INNER! BRW INC. • THRESHER SOUARE • 700 THIRD STREET SOUTH • MINNEAPOLIS.MINNESOTA 55/15 • PHONE 612/370.0700 FAX 612/370-13 March 6, 1990 Mr. Paul Burke U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 400 Sibley St. Paul , MN 55101 Dear Paul , • I am writing to you regarding the off-site mitigation area for the Lake Drive project in Chanhassen. This project was approved by the Corps in May of 1989 (Nationwide Permit 89-2081N-74). As you recall , much of the wetland impact imposed by Lake Drive was mitigated on-site, leaving only 0.5 acres that needed to be compensated for off-site. The City offered to create a "two-pond" system in the northwest quadrant of Highway 5 and CSAH 17, as shown in Figure 1A. The reason behind this letter is to describe to you the proposed change in the loca- tion of Pond A. See Figure 1B. • The City has run into some problems with the landowner of Mitigation Area #2. The present landowner feels that the area originally proposed for Pond A repre- sents a prime upland location for business development given its proximity to the intersection of Highway 5 and CSAH 17. In negotiations with the landowner, the landowner had told the City that if they can keep this parcel they will cooperate with the City on other City projects proposed in this area. However, if they are forced to sell (through condemnation by the City) , negotiations will become much more difficult for the City on all other projects proposed for this area. Therefore, in an attempt to avoid any unnecessary conflicts with the landowner, the City proposes to move Pond A to the location shown in Figure 2A. Figure 2B shows the same plan with the proposed location of a future frontage road through the area. Pond A could theoretically be moved north of the original site, on upland adjacent to CSAH 17; however, the steep grades in this area would impose a higher cost for excavation than condemnation of the original parcel would impose. In addition, Pond A could not be located west of the existing wetland because the intended purpose of the two-pond system was to treat storm water runoff from the east before it enters the wetland. The new pond design would require some excavation and filling of the existing wetland. However, the net gain in wetland area will outweigh the loss in this area. A loss of 1.34 acres would occur in the existing wetland as a result of the placement of fill for the berm or dike and the excavation of a ponding area that would receive storm water runoff through an extension of storm water collection pipes. A mitigation area of 2.74 acres would be created adjacent to • __._ —.• _- --- ANN1MAI(IN III IN 11NC11.11N(NKIS7 WWM'N 1711 JNMt;1:NMM41111N(: 61111111, (MWILJ 1KNt111I ORNN(1W no IJK r:1. I(KYW1111'VNK!A111) 1111711 JAM:: tMA1 WA.1 tAllIt1111 11KMA':1( ■1K 1I (.INK:!• AMIMM CI1* MIAMI II WW1:'(1M.t4ff.K1 K 1NI11 McNAMAIIA 1K1.IIN1)111'1(AKM IWr H IRCKMNNU (*MC:J7:1111111 .11111 V IN MARI IVI fit('IMIIM MNMNIL MA MINNEAPOLIS DENVEn PHOENIX TUCSON ST. PETERSBU • s. t, Mr. Paul Burke ,;, March 6, 1990 Page 2 the west edge of the existing wetland. The size of this mitigation area compen- sates for both the 1.34 acres lost to Pond A, and the 0.5 acres of off-site mitigation promised as part of the Lake Drive project. It is the intention •of the City that some of the additional 0.9 acres of mitigation could be used as a mitigation bank for another City project. The City would appreciate a prompt response from you on the feasibility of this new design. I have discussed this with Vern Rieter of the Corps, and his response was that if the new design achieves the same effect as the original design he doesn't see a problem with it. However, he wants to see any plans before we go ahead with anything and would like us to discuss it with you. Thank you for taking the time to review this matter. Sincerely; BRW, INC. C:?--e-XZ4ee-/ Beth Kunkel Wildlife Biologist BK/lm Attachments cc: Vern Reiter, COE Gary Chret, BRW Jon Horn, BRW Orr Schelen Ma ron& a }; Ye• > Associates,Inc. 2021 East Hennepin Avenue Minneapolis,MN 55413 612-331-8660 FAX 331-3806 Engineers Surveyors Planners February 21, 1990 Ms. JoAnn Olsen Senior Planner City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Lake Drive East, Wetland Impact OSM Comm. No. 4358 Dear Ms. Olsen: The City of Chanhassen is proposing to improve Lake Drive East from its point of intersection with Dakota Avenue to a point 900 feet east of this intersection. Existing utilities in the area will also be improved, and a limited amount of wetland alteration will result from these improvements. This letter is written in support of a wetland alteration permit. The permit application is attached. The existing land use in the vicinity is vacant and is zoned for commercial/industrial uses. All of the vacant land is surrounded by established development. Improved Lake Drive East will cross three different types of landscape and will impact wetland, as well as upland grass areas and woodland. A site visit has been made and the wetland areas have been identified and located as a result of an on-site investigation. There are two primary areas of upland wetland that will be impacted. These areas have been staked in the field, mapped and depicted as Area A - West and Area B - East on exhibit 1. Information on the west and east wetland is provided below. AREA A - WEST A total of 14,375 square feet of wetland is present in the Area A - West. There are three different types of wetland located here including Type 2 - inland fresh meadow, Type 3 - inland shallow fresh marshes, and Type 6 - shrub swamp. Attachment A provides a description of all types of wetland referenced in this letter. 2,625 square feet of wetland in the Area A - West would be impacted by the improvement to Lake Drive East. The types and amount of wetland impacted is summarized in the following table. AREA A - West Wetland Area Impacted Type 2 Impacted 975 square feet Type 6 Impacted 650 square feet Wetland Area Not Impacted 12,750 square feet Total Wetland Area 14,750 square feet 88% of the wetland, 12,750 square feet, in the Area A - West will not be impacted by this road construction. AREA B - EAST A total of 19,000 square feet of wetland exists in Area B - East. There are a variety of wetland types scattered throughout this area and the types change according to elevation and the location of low pockets or the ditch. Therefore, it is very difficult to determine the exact amount of wetland area according to type in Area B - East. There are five different wetland types that exist here; Type 2 - fresh meadow, Type 3 - shallow fresh marsh, Type 5 - open water, and a combination of Types 6 and 7 - shrub and wooded swamps. In order to quantify the areas of wetland in Area B - East, it is possible t -o discuss the percentage of wetland types based on site observation. This information is summarized in the table below. AREA B - EAST Wetland Area Impacted Type 2 Impacted 10% 1,900 square feet Type 3 Impacted 7% 1,330 square feet Type 5 Impacted 3% 570 square feet Types 6 & 7 Impacted 80% 15,200 square feet Total Wetland Area 19,000 square feet All the wetland in Area B - East will be impacted by the improvement of the roadway and utilities. It should also be noted that with the construction of the storm water improvements that the ditch will be removed and the source of surface water for Area B - East will be eliminated. WOODLAND There is a third area of woodland between Area A - West and Area B - East. Based on the site visit and an analysis of observed vegetation types, it was determined that this is not a wetland. Upland varieties, primarily young oak trees, were observed and this provides evidence that it is not wetland. COMPENSATION 20,625 square feet, .47 acres, of wetland will be lost to the improvement of Lake Drive East and utilities. Compensation measures can be taken to replace this wetland, and based on the probable future of development on the site, compensation will need to occur elsewhere within the city. Considering the limited amount of area to be restored, it is suggested that only one type of 6 and 7 - shrub and wooded swamps, provide the most advantage to wildlife. Therefore, expanding one of these types of wetland would provide the most benefit. Permit requirements of other agencies, such as the Corp of Engineers, should be reviewed prior to construction. It is planned that the bid date for this project will be April 6, 1990. Please advise us of any additional work that will be required to keep this project on schedule. If you have any questions, please call Pete Willenbring at 378-6399. Sincerely, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Laurie McRostie Peter R. Willenbring, P.E. Landscape Architect Manager, Water Resources Department cc: Gary Warren Bud Osmundson Pete Willenbring Enclosures /1mt ATTACHMENT A WETLAND DESCRIPTION Type 2 - Fresh Meadow. The soil usually is without standing water during most of the growing season but is waterlogged within at least a few inches of its surface. Vegetation includes grasses, sedges, rushes, and various broad-leaved plants. Meadows may fill shallow lake basins, sloughs, or farmland depressions, or these meadows may border shallow marshes on the lakeward side. Hay is often cut from such wetland areas. Type 3 - Shallow Fresh Marsh. The soil is usually waterlogged during the growing season; often it is covered with as much as 6 inches or more of water. Vegetation includes grasses, bulrush, spikerush, and various other marsh plants such as cattail , arrowhead, pickerelweed, " and smartweed. These marshes may nearly fill shallow lake basins or sloughs, or they may border deep marshes on the landward side. They are also common as seep areas on irrigated lands. Type 5 - Open Water. Shallow ponds and reservoirs are included in this wetland type. Water is usually less than 10-feet deep and is fringed by a border of emergent vegetation such as cattail and bulrush. Submergent or floating vegetation (mainly at water depths of less than 6 feet) includes pondweed, wildcelery, coontail , watermilfoil and waterlily. Type 6 - Shrub Swamp. The soil is usually waterlogged during the growing season, and is often covered with as much as 6 inches of water. Vegetation includes alder, willow, and dogwood. Shrub swamps usually occur along sluggish streams and on floodplains. Type 7 - Wooded Swamp. The soil is waterlogged to within a few inches of its surface during the growing season, and is often covered with as much as 1 foot of water. Wooded swamps occur mostly along sluggish streams, on floodplains, on flat uplands, and in very shallow lake basins. In Minnesota, tree species include tamarack, white cedar, black spruce, balsam fir, red maple, and black ash. WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT EVALUATION WORKSHEET To Be Completed By Applicant and Submitted with Application (Attach additional sheets if necessary) 1. WETLAND DESCRIPTION: Size: See Attached Letter for Description Class: Type: Location: Lakeside _ Streamside Upland Watershed District: Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed Area of Open Water: Drainage Flows To: Rice Lake Marsh Vegetation Types: Soil Types : 2 . DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ALTERATION: Fill of .47 acres of wetland area. 3. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED ALTERATION: Improve Lake Drive East and local utilities. 4 . APPLICABLE WETLAND ORDINANCE SECTION: Sec. 20.437 5. A. DISCUSS THE IMPACTS ON THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IF NO ALTERATION IS MADE: __-__Bpadwav and utility improvements would not be possible. 5 . B. IDENTIFY AND DISCUSS OTHER ALTERNATIVES TO WETLAND ALTERATION: Lake Drive East is in existance. Improvement would not be possible without the proposed wetland alteration. C. IDENTIFY THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF THE PROPOSED ALTERATION: The area infrastructure will be improved, storm water drainage will be more controlled and directed. Wildlife habitat primarily for small mammals and birds will be eliminated. 6 . USING THE WETLAND ORDINANCE STANDARDS AS A GUIDE, DETERMINE WHETHER THERE ARE ANY INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN THE ORDINANCE AND PROPOSED ALTERATION: —2— Planning Commission Meeting March 21, 1990 - Page 12 Emming : The other thing is the City Attorney ought to look at. . . Wildermuth: The other thing is, we ought to have some kind of a provisi . in here that the city staff and DNR and the property owners get together establish how far back the excavation has to be. 45 feet is an awful lo way. Erhart: Well I thought we did that. Effectively by adding the new poin I think we did leave it open for discussion. Ahrens : If they can come up with some proof. Emmings: But the other thing is Jim, the DNR's interest ends at the ordinary high water mark. They have no interest above that. We have stricter standards than they do and we' re entitled to have those. Bob Pfankuch: Just one more thing . City sewer extends beyond the ordina high water mark. The DNR, Pat Lynch doesn't go with a straight line between the two markers so I suggested a curving more natural shoreline certainly at least to the extent of the city sewer. He said if you have pull it back to the ordinary high water mark, the City will have to remov the soil . And incidentally, that 20 foot easement was put in by the City and the wetlands were covered by the City so I 'm really not responsible f that. That ' s an existing condition. That ' s 10 feet on each side of the sewer. 10 feet on Frost' s property. . . Erhart : Okay, this will go to City Council , unless you have some further discussion with staff, on April 9th. PUBLIC HEARING: WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR FILLING AND ALTERATION OF CLASS A AND B WETLANDS LOCATED ON LAKE DRIVE EAST, SOUTH OF HWY. 5 AND EAST OF DAKOTA AVENUE, CITY OF CHANHASSEN. Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report. Vice Chairman Erhart called the public hearing to order . Ellson moved , Emmings seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Wildermuth : It seems inconsistent that here we' re going to fill a wetland and on the issue just preceeding this we' re going to make people restore i wetland . This is all in the Lake Riley watershed right Jo Ann? So it's legitimate to do this trade-off as far as the DNR is concerned? Olsen: What we' re doing is we' re not redirecting, there' s only a small portion of the area A wetland so the water that purpose is serving has not been altered . The water runoff would still be maintained in the area B wetland by putting in the storm sewer. It's just not running above ground , it' s running below ground. Planning Commission Meeting March 21, 1990 - Page 13 Wilderriuth : I support the staff recommendation on this issue. Ahrens: I had a problem with this too for the same reasons that Jiro stated , although I can see that there is a different situation here. I didn't hear much talk though when the last discussion about the type of wetland that was located on these people' s property. Whether it was a Class VII or whatever class it was and whether or not it was good or bad. Olsen: It was Class A. Ahrens: All the way up? All 45 feet up? Olsen: Right , was a Class A. It wasn' t as far as the quality, it did have purple loosestrife in it and so that wasn't the highest quality but the wetlands adjacent to open waters are some of the most important so I do strongly feel that there' s a different between these two situations . Ahrens : And there' s no place on this property to relocate the wetland? Olsen: There are several different properties along here. And again, area A really doesn' t have to be. They' re going to be developing . The McDonalds site is coming in in the near future too so we don' t want to replace it there . Krauss: The expansion. Olsen: Or the expansion. Their site plan. The area B wetland , these sites are going to be developed in the future so that' s not really where we would want to replace them. There is a wetland that was a an made pond on the DataSery site and we are looking. They are going to be coming in the future too to replace that wetland and provide a larger one, almost double the size and create a better wetland. So there was the opportunity to possibly have, replace some of these areas on that site. It just didn' t, we weren' t verified that was going to actually happen and we still aren' t. Whereas with the Eckankar site we do know that that ' s going ahead . We do have that replacement there that we can use. Ahrens: Is that the only location where you' re relocating wetlands? Olsen: Currently that's the one site that the City is involved with as far as our mitigation bank this is going . We always prefer to replace them on that site and we did discuss that with this situation and didn't really have a place within the alignment to do that. Ahrens: So if McDonalds comes in with a proposal to. . . Olsen: They're not going to be, they're just going to be going up to the edge of that. That is one, that' s the type of wetland that we have allowed to be filled and then replaced elsewhere on that site or to be improved somehow. The McDonalds site plan, with their expansion doesn't impact that wetland so we don' t have the opportunity at that time to require them to, if they' re going to be filling it or altering it to replace it with another wetland on that site. But possibly when that property inbetween those two Planning Commission Meeting March 21, 1990 - Page 14 wetlands, when that develops , then we would have that opportunity if the_ impact those. But we just don' t have control of those properties. We can't really say. It' s a city project so we really can ' t say that they have to replace the wetland and we would have to purchase the property. Ahrens: I 'm just curious. How is the City able to keep expanding the wetland on the Eckankar property? Olsen: On the Eckankar property? We' re purchasing a portion of that fo storm water management. It's part of the downtown, the West 78th Street realignment. Ahrens: It ' s just going to keep expanding? Keep purchasing? Olsen: No, we already have it designed and it was in excess of the acre- over what we had to use to replace another wetland that we altered with Lake Drive near Rosemount. Krauss : Mr . Chairman, if I could expand on that just for a second. If i seems like we fly by the seat of our pants with these sort of replacement that ' s in effect what we do right now. Staff has been talking to the Cit Council for the last 4 or 5 months about the possibility of undertaking a storm water management plan, a comprehensive storm water management plan that would also embody a very heavy wetland protection effort and probabl a redrafting of our wetland ordinance. Those sorts of trade-offs would b very clear and understandable under such a plan. I think the Council and staff see the merit of that and now it' s a matter of bringing that about . We're looking for some financing mechanisms for it. It's rather an expensive and lenghty process but that' s clearly the way to resolve these things in a comprehensive manner. Until that time, we' re doing the best can with these replacement programs. Ahrens : It does seem arbitrary to me and I don' t understand what standar are being used to determine what wetland should stay and which one should go except for some are more valuable than others but I still don' t understand those standards. That's why I have a hard time voting on this to tell you the truth. Erhart: Annette, do you have something there? Ellson: I saw this once before and I it confused me at the time and I wai going to ask you if we were buying the land on Eckankar or if we just sore of tell them to make it bigger and they' ll do it or whatever. What I was wondering is if somebody else was developing and they couldn' t build their wetland on their exact site like we'd prefer and yet they owned other lane within our property, would we allow them that same opportunity that we're giving ourselves is what I 'm saying? I mean for all fairness we should probably, I've never been involved in one. Olsen: That's never occurred but yes. Ellson: I can just see someone coming up to us and say well , you guys j u moved yours when you wanted to take it out and I own a little patch of lay Planning Commission Meeting March 21, 1990 - Page 15 over here , what if I just turned it into wetlands. Would we allow that sort of thing as a mitigation? Olsen : That is something that we will be, that' s kind of a new thing that's happening with the mitigation banking. If they don't have other land and the City does that we can develop and they can provide like a park fee or wetland fee. Ellson : Yeah, somehow buy it. Olsen: Right. The money that would go towards. . . Ellson: Get it dedicated towards that. Olsen: If it' s a viable Class A wetland, even with the City we try to work around that because those you just can' t replace. Ellson: The other question I have was the Eckankar property wetland is going to be an improvement over the current one? Olsen: Over these two? Ellson : Right . Olsen: Oh yeah. Ellson : From what I remember . In other words, it' s going to be we' re taking 2 okay ones and we' re replacing it in a totally different area with a great one or something to this effect. Olsen: We are. Ellson: So that might be another precedence that it has to go to an improvement or something like that? Olsen : We've done that too. Ellson: Well I 'd vote to accept the staff proposal . Nothing further . Emmings: There's Class A and B wetlands in each of these areas. When other people come in and want to, just looking to the one to the west there, when they want to alter wetlands like that. Would we feel it' s necessary for them to alter it, then usually we have them improve the balance of the wetland. Is there an opportunity to do that there? Olsen: Again, it' s not on our property. I don' t know how we would, would we have to acquire that property or whether we could do it with an easement. Emmings: Oh, I see. But we' re acquiring . . . Olsen: It's just where that dot is. Planning Commission Meeting March 21, 1990 - Page 16 Emmings: Yeah , I can see it. We've acquired that property. Olsen: Through an easement. Well and actually when McDonalds comes through their platting , we will be acquiring this as right-of-way. . . Emmings: So really it' s not ours. We don't have the opportunity to go i there and improve it. Olsen: This one will return to it' s state . I mean it ' s going to be altered but it won' t have that water. The ditch running through will be , the middle will return to it' s natural state. Emmings: Well I guess I can see a rationale, although I think the City should look for opportunities to improve wetlands that we affect. I gues it wouldn' t be appropriate here but I think we should look for those opportunities . If we' re going to require it of everybody else, we ought be setting the tone but this I guess is not a place to do it. It seems t me to be distinguishable from the last one we were talking about when we were talking about putting in public improvements that benefit everybody. That' s quite a different thing than filling wetlands on your own land simply because you prefer to so I don' t have too much trouble with that. just hope we' re doing everything we can to look for alternatives for the path of storm sewers and everything so we avoid these areas but I vote fo this assuming that all that ' s already been taken into consideration . Erhart: Who owns the property? Olsen : It ' s Chanhaven Plaza who actually owns it. Erhart: I mean someone owns that whole piece? Krauss : Yes . It ' s privately owned and McDonalds is buying a sliver of i Olsen: And then DataSery also. Erhart : In our ordinance, wetlands ordinance, do we have a minimum size wetland? How do you know when a wetland isn't a horse making a hole in t dirt? Krauss : Yeah, there's a real dilemma there frankly Mr . Chairman. That' s one of the other issues that we want to get at with this storm water management plan. Our ordinance basically says we know it when we see it . And depending on who's looking, it's either there or it isn' t. We try to be consistent but it's difficult. Erhart : Essentially I guess my feeling isn' t a whole lot different than what appears to be the consensus on the commission here. I would add tha in reality I think we have to put a minimum size of what is a wetland because from the standpoint of people managing their land and trying to, - practical approach to land development as much as I think most developers that come in here want to work with us on our wetland ordinance, there is some point where a half acre wetland, although it may be valuable, it's value at some point where it just becomes such a small thing relative to • Planning Commission Meeting March 21, 1990 - Page 17 what the social function of the land is , that you have to draw a line someplace. I know the DNR I think draws a line at 1 acre. Krauss : No , it ' s 10 acres or 2 1/2 in some. Erhart: Isn't there something that' s 1? Olsen: If you fill more than 1 acre of a wetland . Krauss: What we've been looking at is a system that doesn't take size only into account but it takes the value of the wetland . You can have a half acre wetland that's pristine wildlife habitat and you have a 5 acre one that 's somewhat worthless and there are ways now of getting those gradiations down on a map and you can accept changes in one and not the other . Erhart : Anyway, in my mind it' s something less than an acre and these are both less than half an acre and so again, not to repeat but I agree with the statements here and with that, those comments, if we' re all ready, entertain a motion on this . Elison: I move the Planning Commission approve the Wetland Alteration Permit #90-1 as shown on plans dated March 12, 1990 with the two conditions outlined in the staff ' s report . Erhart: Is there a second? Wildermuth : Second . Erhart: Any discussion? Elison moved , Wildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Wetland Alteration Permit #90-1 as shown on the plans dated March 12, 1990 with the following conditions: 1. The type of wetlands that are being removed as part of the Lake Drive East improvements including Types II , III , V, VI and VII will be provided in any equal amount at the wetland site on the Eckankar property which is being developed as part of the West 78th Street Detachment Program. 2. Type III erosion control shall be provided to protect unaltered wetland areas. All voted in favor and the motion carried .