The URL can be used to link to this page

5 Moon Valley Interim Use Permt CITY 0 F CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Bou levard POBcx147 C~larlrlasse!l. M~J 55317 Administration Prìllrle: 9522271100 Fax. 9522271110 Building Inspections Prwi18 9522271180 Fax 9522271190 Engineering pflOr18 9522271160 Fax 952.2271170 Finance Pr¡CJr18 9522271140 Fax 9522271110 Park & Recreation Ph () fl e. 952. 22 7 1120 Fax 9522271110 Recreatlun Cerlter 2310 Couiter Bouievard pf!or.e 9522271400 Fax 9522271404 Planning & Natural Resources Phorl8 9522271130 Fax 952.2271110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax 9522271310 Senior Center Phofle. 9522271125 Fax 952.2271110 Web Site WWWCI. chan ~lasserì. rnr!. LJS 5* "'~ MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Matt Saam, Assistant City Engineer Bob Generous, Senior Planner DA TE: September 27, 2004 10~\¿. "J ~ V· ~ '..... SUBJ: Moon Valley, Planning Case #04-27 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The applicant is requesting an interim use permit to permit the excavation, grading, and restoration of the existing mining pit and a future development area west of the mining pit. The proposed grading and slope restoration will prepare the site for future development when urban services are available, stabilize the site to reduce run-off and erosion, and permit the vegetation, especially the trees, to grow between now and the time the site is developed. At the August 17, 2004 Planning Commission meeting, a concern was raised by a resident during the public hearing for this site. The concern centered on the occasional flooding of Trunk Highway (TH) 212 and how that could restrict access to/from a future development on the Moon Valley site. The resident was concerned that future residents may be trapped inside the development if TH 212 would flood. Staff has since reviewed the existing topography of TH 212 adjacent to the site. It appears that there is a low point in TH 212, approximately one-half mile east of the site, at an elevation of 710. This low point is west of Dell Road, which is the closest intersecting street east of the site. The elevation of TH 212 west of the site only drops to an elevation of 722, which means that TH 212 would flood on the east side of the site before flooding on the west. The road flooding east of the site would prevent any vehicular movement to Dell Road but residents could still travel to/from the site from the western side via TH 101 north. Staff has also reviewed the comments from the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District. Based on this review, staff is recommending the addition of condition 32: "The applicant's engineer must work with City staff to revise the drainage calculations per City standards and NURP requirements." Additionally, there was some question as to quality of the trees in the areas that would be removed. Staff met with Alan Olson, Regional Forester for the DNR, to discuss this question. Mr. Olson made a site inspection on September 10,2004. His assessment of the site was one of remnant, Big Woods forest in good condition with little rot and a large number of hardwood trees in the 3D-inch size class. He specifically noted the northwestern forested area as being of high- quality, large diameter sugar maple and basswood trees. According to the plans, The City of Ghanhassen. A growing community with clean lakes. quality schools. a ctlarrwflg dO\\:l\crAIl t'lr'\!';Q tJ¡jSI'ì8sses.vvirldIIìQ trails. and beautilul parks. A great place to live. work, and play. Todd Gerhardt Moon Valley, Planning Case #04-27 September 27, 2004 Page 2 this area is to be preserved. The wooded area within the grading limits had a greater mix of species and more size classes, i.e., had a greater range of diameters. While this area is of good quality, it is not of the caliber of the northwestern area. Mr. Olson suggested that the developer look at harvesting the trees within the grading limits. Based on this comment, staff is recommending the addition of condition 31: "The harvesting of timber shall be limited to the area within the grading limits." ACTION REQUIRED City Council approval requires a majority of City Council present. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 17,2004, to review the proposed development. The Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 to approve the proposed project. RECOMMENDA TION Staff and the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the following motion: "The Chanhassen City Council approves the motion for the interim use permit for Moon Valley as specified in the staff report dated August 17, 2004." A TT ACHMENTS 1. Planning Commission Staff Report Dated August 17, 2004. 2. Planning Commission Minutes of August 17, 2004. 3. Letter from Terry L. Schwalbe to Bob Generous dated August 31, 2004. 4. Letter from Alan E. Olson to Jill Sinclair dated 9/17/04. 5. Letter from Daniel J. Herbst to Mayor, City Council and Staff. g:\plan\2004 planning cases\04-27 - moon valley gravel mine\executive summary moon valley.doc PC DATE: Aug. 17, 2004 ŒJ CC DATE: Sept. 13,2004 CITY OF CHANHASSEN REVIEW DEADLINE: 9/14/04 Extended per applicant to 9/27/04 CASE #: 04-27 BY: RG, LH, MS, JS ~ Z < U ~ ~ ~ ~ < < ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Moon Valley Gravel Mine Restoration - Request for Interim Use Permit (Grading) on property currently used for a mining operation as well as future developable area. LOCA TION: South of Hennepin County Regional Railroad, north of State Highway 212 and east of Sorensen Addition 100 Flying Cloud Drive APPLICANT: Beatrice Zwiers and Moon Valley Aggregates, Inc 11111 Deuce Road Elko, MN 55020 (952) 937-0716 PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural Estate District (A2) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential- Medium and High Density ACREAGE: 72.24 DENSITY: NA SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Request for an Interim Use Permit to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration on the Moon Valley Aggregates, Inc. property and an adjacent site to close up the mining operation and prepare the sites for potential future development. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City has limited discretion in approving or denying interim use permits, based on whether or not the proposal meets the conditional use permit standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. If the City finds that all the applicable conditional use permit standards are met, the permit must be approved. This is a quasi -judicial decision. Location Map Moon Valley Gravel Mine Restoration Interim Use Permit City of Chanhassen Planning Case No. 04-27 :¡;:Oi'.... .C=J· C\00 '-, '\ 2 f\'l\t'g . .. . '.\ .. \.)S 2 ,.,. ../ \\, -' Moon Valley Gravel Mine IUP Planning Case No. 04-27 August 17, 2004 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting an interim use permit to permit the excavation, grading, and restoration of the existing mining pit and a future development area west of the mining pit. Interim use permits are processed in the same manner as conditional use permits. The operation will require the removal of approximatelyl.8 million cubic yards of material from the site. The project site is adjacent to the Richard T. Anderson Conservation Area in Eden Prairie. To the south across Highway 212 are the Minnesota Valley Wildlife Refuge and the Minnesota River. To the north are the Hennepin County Regional Trail and the Settlers West subdivision. Access to the site is proposed via Highway 212 (Flying Cloud Drive). The proposed site grading and slope restoration will prepare the site for future development when urban services are available, stabilize the site to reduce run-off and erosion, and permit the vegetation, especially the trees, to grow between now and the time the site is developed. The previous approved site grading plan would have graded the site out to Highway 212, created a usable development area of 8.5 acres and altered bluff area in both the northwest and southwest comers of the property. In an effort to try and preserve more of the mature trees on the site, staff is recommending that the grading on the eastern side of the creek end at the proposed high-point elevation in the usable area of 756. With the exception of the bluff area, this area could be included in the calculation of developable area at the time of development review. In addition to the mining operation, the site has been used as a rifle-range. Due to the mining use of the property, the fact that materials have been brought in to the site and the potential problems from lead in the soil from the gun range operation, staff is recommending that a Phase I Environmental Audit be performed on the property. Staff is recommending approval of the interim use permit subject to the recommended conditions of approval. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 7, Article III. Excavating, Mining, Filling and Grading Sections 20-231 through 20-237, Conditional Use Permits BACKGROUND May 1990, the city adopts an ordinance requiring persons engaging in earthwork activities to obtain a permit. September 1990, Moon Valley initiates a lawsuit claiming that the City did not have the authority to require Moon Valley to obtain a permit. In April 1991, the court ruled that the City can require Moon Valley to obtain a permit. Moon Valley Gravel Mine IUP Planning Case No. 04-27 August 17, 2004 Page 3 June 22, 1992, the Chanhassen City Council approves an earth work permit for the mining operation. August 1993, the court upheld the l00-foot setback requirement for mining operations to the property line and addressed the establishment of a restoration fund. January 1994, the City Council further considers the earthwork permit in light of the court order from August 1993. February 1996, the City executes an earthwork permit agreement resolving the mining operation and restoration. DISCUSSION GRADINGIDRAINAGEIEROSION CONTROL The applicant is requesting an interim use permit to excavate approximately 1.8 million cubic yards of material from the site. The goal of the grading is to restore the severe erosion areas on the site and to leave the site in a condition that will allow future multi-family housing to be developed. The applicant is proposing to grade down at steep, 40% (2.5: 1) slopes from the high points on the north and south sides of the property. This will allow a relatively flat area with a gentle slope of 4% (25: 1) to be developed in the center of the property. The flat area will be developed into multi-family housing sites when municipal sewer and water is extended to the area in the future. In addition, the severe rutting and erosion gullies that currently exist on the site will be restored. Permanent vegetation will be developed over all bare soil areas. Previously, a restoration plan for the main pit area east of the creek had been prepared in 1992 and approved by the city for this site. The 1992 plan proposed to grade approximately 3 acres of bluff area with 3.9 acres of tree removal. The current proposal has approximately 2.6 acres of bluff grading and 7.3 acres of tree removal. While the new plan does result in more tree loss, the impact to the bluff area is less than the previously approved plan. Also, the amount of usable or developable area has been increased from approximately 8.5 to 14 acres. In an effort to try and preserve more of the mature trees on the site, staff is recommending that the grading on the eastern side of the creek end at the proposed high-point elevation in the usable area of 756. This would preserve approximately 1.6 acres of additional tree canopy while decreasing the bluff impact from 2.6 to 2.4 acres. Terminating the grading at the high-point would more closely follow the natural drainage pattern in the area. It would also alleviate the need for additional storm sewer in the future in order to capture the drainage and route it back to Pond 2. The usable area available would still be 12.4 acres which is nearly four acres greater than the 1992 plan. The existing site generally drains from the north to the south. There is an existing creek/wetland which runs through the center of the site. Eventually, the entire site drains to the Minnesota River valley through existing culverts under TH 212. Under proposed conditions, the entire graded site area will drain to the two proposed ponds on either side of the creek which divides the site. Pond 1, on the west side of the creek, will outlet to the adjacent creek and Pond 2 will outlet to the TH 212 ditch. As in the existing state, the treated storm water will then drain to the Minnesota River valley under TH 212. Details for the proposed pond outlets should be Moon Valley Gravel Mine IUP Planning Case No. 04-27 August 17, 2004 Page 4 submitted for review by the City. Each of the proposed ponds has been designed to NURP standards and sized for the future developed state of the site. The submitted drainage calculations show that the existing 10- and 100-year runoff rates are being met, per City Code. On-site ponding should be adjusted, if necessary, at the time of site development to meet the City's requirements for proposed build-out conditions. In the future, when a development proposal is submitted, drainage and utility easements over the ponds and creek will be required. Erosion control has been shown on the plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practices Handbook (BMPH). Staff would recommend additional Type 1 silt fence in the southeast corner of the site around the grading limits and around the proposed pond outlet apron. All disturbed areas as a result of construction are required to be reseeded and mulched within two weeks of site grading. If erosion control measures installed in conjunction with this interim use permit are deemed by the City to be ineffective, the City will inform the applicant in writing of any deficiencies. The applicant will be required to remedy the deficiencies prior to site development. The required remedy(ies) may include, but are not limited to: increased frequency of plantings, additional erosion control blanket, or terracing of the northernmost slope to permanently break up the length of the slope. Phasing is a very important management tool for erosion control. Stabilization of the toe (first 150 feet of the slope) is needed immediately upon final grade. Stabilization should be done in phases. Large portions of the site should not be left exposed over weekends or during forecasted heavy rains. The slopes should be tracked with a dozer at all times. The dozer should be run perpendicular to the slope to track the slope. The northeast "corner" of the slope will be an area of instability because storm water will concentrate in the swale and possibly form a gully. (This area is north of soil boring 18, south of soil boring 14 and in-between soil borings 10 and 15.) A terrace, turf reinforcement mat and slope drain will likely be needed in this area to promote long term stability. Due to the steep slopes and long runs of the slope, straw fiber rolls may be needed to aid in stabilization of all the slopes with the MN DOT Category 3, 2S wood fiber blankets. The fiber rolls would help break up the length of slope and minimize erosion potential of the slope with the erosion control blankets. Six-inch fiber rolls are needed every 15 to 20 feet. Proper blanket application is crucial for this site. The blankets must make 1000/0 contact with the soil and stapled according to manufactures specifications. The staple pattern is vital to proper blanket function. The blankets should be head trenched as well. Geotextile and riprap or geogrids or other approved stabilization is needed to provide toe protection; there is a chance the toe of the 2.5 to 1 may start head cutting without toe protection. The seed mix specified (MN DOT 500) should be changed to MN DOT Native mix 340 (Sandy Mid Height, dry conditions- i.e. south facing slope). An application rate of 16 pounds per acre is recommended (20 pounds per acre for hydoseeding or broadcasting). Depending on the final soil used, blanket application may be difficult. If the soil is too sandy, stapling the blanket over long runs will be futile. 'Terracing' blankets or using strips of blankets with a heavy application of the seed mix (20 pounds per acre) and hydromulch will be needed. Silt fence should be installed at least 25 feet away from the toe of the slope to provide storage and allow the silt fence to function properly. As stated on the plan, the temporary sediment Moon Valley Gravel Mine IUP Planning Case No. 04-27 August 17, 2004 Page 5 basins must be installed prior to grading activities. Berms may be needed to divert runoff into the basins along TH 212. Subsurface storm water movement should be considered with surface movement of storm water. When considering storm water management, installation of draintile at the toe should be considered to reduce any future possibility of sloughing due to saturation from ground water or slope seepage. It is currently unclear where the applicant will be hauling the excess material to. The grading is proposed to be a phased operation with the 1 st phase beginning this fall. It is anticipated that the 1st phase will begin on the eastern edge of the site and will restore the slope coming down from the Settlers West development to the north. The applicant should be aware that if the excess material is transported to another site in Chanhassen, a separate grading permit will be required for the other property. Permitted hours of operation will be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday with no work permitted on Sunday or legal holidays. Staff has not yet received a proposed haul route as required. Staff is recommending that the applicant provide a proposed haul route for review and approval. In addition, appropriate signage for hauling along TH 212 will be required. Staff is recommending that the interim use permit expire five years from the date of approval from the City Council. Annually, a grading permit shall be required. The permit maybe renewed, however, on an annual basis subject to City staff review of conformance with the conditions of the interim use permit and approval of the annual permit. The applicant will need to request a formal extension 60 days prior to the expiration date. Financial security to guarantee restoration and erosion control measures will be required with the permit. The permit is also subject to administration fees. The administration fees are based on the number of cubic yards of material being graded. The fees are taken from the Uniform Building Code Appendix, Chapter 33. Based on 1.8 million cubic yards of material, the applicant must pay the City $7,124.00 prior to the City signing the permit. LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION The applicant is proposing to remove 13 acres of trees off the site due to grading operations. The site currently has 34 acres of trees, much of them in bluff areas. Staff is proposing that grading at the western end of the mining area be stopped at the 956 contour. This would save approximately 1.4 acres of trees. These trees may later be removed for development, but do not appear to be a necessary item at this point. Tree removal calculations are not required for the site restoration since is it not a subdivision application. The calculations will be required at the time of site development. Restoration of the slopes will require seeding, fiber blankets and tree planting. The applicant has proposed wood fiber blankets for erosion control. Staff recommends that MNDOT Native Mix 340 be used for the seeding. This seed mix contains mid-height grasses recommended for sandy and/or dry areas. All restored slopes shall be planted with trees. The trees shall be bare-root, native species, one-half to one-inch in diameter, five to ten foot spacing in a random pattern from the top to the toe of the slope. The trees are to be planted closely assuming a 10-20% normal loss due to environmental conditions and stock vigor. The area to be planted is approximately Moon Valley Gravel Mine IUP Planning Case No. 04-27 August 17, 2004 Page 6 21.86 acres. The approximate number of trees needed is 9,531 to 38,080, depending on the spacing. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the edge of grading limits. According to ordinance, when the site is developed for residential or office, none of the wooded areas on bluffs will be counted towards canopy coverage for the site. Additional plantings will be required at the time of site development. RECOMMENDA TION Staff and the Planning Commission recommends that the Plaßßißg C0mmi88i0ß City Council adopt the following motion: "The Plooßißg C0mm.i88i0ß Fe@0IDm@ß88 aIJIJr0":al 0f Chanhassen City Council approves Interim Use Permit Planning Case #04-27 to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration as proposed on the plans prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc., dated 7/16/04, subject to the following conditions: 1. The interim use permit shall be approved for a period of five (5) years from the date of City Council approval. Annually, the grading permit must be renewed. The applicant will need to request a formal extension 60 days prior to the expiration date of the permit. 2. The existing buildings and outbuildings and any septic system or wells on site shall be abandoned in accordance with City and/or State codes. 3. The applicant shall perform a Phase I Environmental Audit of the property to determine if the gun range or other site operations have environmentally impacted the property. 4. The applicant must provide the City with a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of $619,650.00 to guarantee erosion control measures and site restoration and compliance with the interim use permit. 5. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agency must be obtained; including but not limited to the MPCA and MnDOT. 6. Details for the proposed pond outlets shall be submitted for review by the City. 7. On-site ponding shall be adjusted, if necessary, at the time of site development to meet the City's requirements for proposed build-out conditions. 8. If erosion control measures installed in conjunction with this interim use permit are deemed by the City to be ineffective, the City shall inform the applicant in writing of any deficiencies. The applicant shall work with the city to remedy the deficiencies in a timely manner. 9. Stabilization of the toe (first 150 feet of the slope) shall be completed immediately upon final grade. Stabilization shall be done in phases. Large portions of the site shall not be left exposed over weekends or during forecasted heavy rains. Moon Valley Gravel Mine IUP Planning Case No. 04-27 August 17, 2004 Page 7 10. The slopes shall be tracked with a dozer at all times. The dozer shall be run perpendicular to the slope to track the slope. 11. The northeast "corner" of the slope (north of soil boring 18, south of soil boring 14 and in- between soil borings 10 and 15) shall be stabilized so as to promote long term stability. This may include a terrace, turf reinforcement mat and slope drain. 12. All blankets installed on site shall be properly applied. The blankets shall make 100% contact with the soil, stapled according to manufacturer's specifications, and head trenched. 13. Geotextile and riprap or geogrids or other approved stabilization shall be used to provide toe protection. 14. The seed mix specified (MN DOT 500) shall be changed to MN DOT Native mix 340 (Sandy Mid Height, dry conditions -i.e. south facing slope). An application rate of 16 pounds per acre is recommended (20 pounds per acre for hydoseeding or broadcasting). 15. Silt fence shall be installed at least 25 feet away from the toe of the slope to provide storage and allow the silt fence to function properly. As stated on the plan, the temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to grading activities. Berms may be needed to divert runoff into the basins along TH 212. 16. The applicant must provide a proposed haul route for review and approval. 17. If the excess material is hauled to another site in Chanhassen, a separate grading permit will be required for the other property. 18. All disturbed areas as a result of construction are required to be reseeded and mulched within two weeks of site grading. 19. The applicant must pay the City an administration fee of $7,124.00 prior to the City signing the permi t. 20. Add the benchmark to the plan that was used for the site survey. 21. End the grading on the eastern side of the creek at the proposed high-point elevation in the usable area of 756. 22. In the future, when a development proposal is submitted, drainage and utility easements over the ponds and creek will be required. 23. Add Type 1 silt fence in the southeast comer of the site around the grading limits and around the proposed pond outlet 24. Permitted hours of operation will be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday with no work permitted on Sunday or legal holidays. Moon Valley Gravel Mine IUP Planning Case No. 04-27 August 17, 2004 Page 8 25. Appropriate signage for hauling along TH 212 is required. 26. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the edge of grading limits. 27. MNDOT Native Mix 340 be used for the seeding 28. All restored slopes shall be planted with trees. The trees shall be bare-root, native species, one-half to one-inch in diameter, five to ten foot spacing in a random pattern from the top to the toe of the slope. The approximate number of trees needed is 20,000 (7' x 7' spacing). Spacing (feet) 5x5 6x6 7x7 8x8 10 x 10 Trees per acre 1,742 1,210 889 681 436 29. A dri veway access to 230 & 240 Erie A venue must be maintained at all times during construction. 30. Submit a plan showing a permanent driveway access alignment for 230 & 240 Erie Avenue. 31. The harvesting of timber shall be limited to the area within the grading limits. 32. The applicant's engineer must work with City staff to revise the drainage calculations per City standards and NURP requirements." A IT ACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation 2. Development Review Application 3. Memo to May, City Council, Planning Commission Chairperson and Members and Staff dated 7 /20/04 4. Reduced Copy Grading Plan 5. Letter from Aaron Mlynek to Robert Generous dated 8/4/04 6. Memo from Dan Edgerton to Terry Schwalbe dated 8/4/04 7. Letter from Tod Sherman to Sharmeen AI-Jaff dated 8/6/04 8. Affidavit of Mailing Notice g:\plan\2004 planning cases\04-27 - moon valley gravel mine\staff report moon valley rev.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE: Application of Beatrice Zwiers and Moon Valley Aggregates for an Interim Use Permit to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration. On August 17, 2004, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly schedule meeting to consider the application of Beatrice Zwiers and Moon Valley Aggregates, Inc. for an interim use permit for the property located at 100 Flying Cloud Drive. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed interim use was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned A-2, Agricultural Estate District. 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential Medium and High Density. 3. The legal description of the property is: All that part of Government Lot 1, Section 36, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, which lies northerly of Trunk Highway No. 212; and, 27 acres in the west half of northeast 1.4 south of the railroad and north of Trunk Highway No. 212, Section 36, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota; 1 acre in Government Lot 3 north of Trunk Highway 212 being that part of the northwest 1.4 of the northeast 1.4 and the northeast 1.4 of the northwest 1.4 in Government lots 2 & 3, Section 36, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota. 4. When approving a conditional use permit, the City must determine the capability of a proposed development with existing and proposed uses. The general issuance standards of the conditional use Section 20-232, include the following 12 items: a. Will not be detrimental to endangerthe public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city through the stabilization and re- vegetation of the slope and the reduction in site erosion. b. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and the zoning code by creating a future development area that may be developed consistently with the land use designation of the property and through the protection and stabilization of the slopes. The earthwork will be maintaining the site in a form suitable for residential use which is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and this chapter. c. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area because the site will be re-vegetated and the slopes stabilized reducing site erosion. The aesthetics of the site will be enhanced with the elimination of the of the gullies/ravines in the site and the establishment of site vegetation. d. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses because the grading and drainage will be contained within the site perimeters. Additionally, hours of operation are limited and specific conditions of approval will be in place and enforced by the city. e. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use since development of the site will be delayed until urban services are available. The use is temporary which does not need to be served by public facilities and services. The proposed grading will prepare the site for future development. The development of the site will require additional city review and approval. f. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community since this is a temporary use. When the site is developed in the future, the development will enhance the city's economic welfare.. g. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare due to excessi ve production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. The proposed grading could result in a temporary increase in traffic, noise and fumes. The conditions of the approval will provide standards by which the activities should be minimized. h. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. Through the use of signage, limits on the hours of operation, and if traffic becomes congested additional limits on the hours of hauling operation could be instituted, potential traffic problems will 2 be mitigated. i. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. The proposal will result in the removal of some existing canopy. However, the site will be re-vegetated and there will be less bluff impact vis-à-vis the previously approved grading/restoration plan for the site. j. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area since the grading and re-vegetation of the site will improve the site aesthetics. k. Will not depreciate surrounding property values since the plan will improve the site and its impacts on the surrounding properties. 1. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in, Chapter 7, Article III of the Chanhassen City Code. 5. The planning report #04-27 dated August 17, 2004, prepared by Matt Saam, et aI, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDA TION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the interim use permi t. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 17th day of August, 2004. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY: Its Chairman 3 04-.JLl CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 CtTY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED JUL 1 6 2004 CHANHASSEN PlÄNNING DEPT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Beatrice Zwiers and Beatrice Zwiers and APPLICANT: Moon Valley Aggregates, Inc. OWNER: Moon Valley Agqreqates, Inc. ADDRESS: 11111 Deuce Road Èlko, MN 55020 ADDRESS: 11111 Deuce Road Elko,.. MN 55020 TELEPHONE (Day Time) 952 -937 -0716 TELEPHONE: 952-937-0716 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Temporary Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements X Interim Use Permit l-/ -¿j Variance Non-conforming Use Permit Wetland Alteration Permit Planned Unit Development* Zoning Appeal Rezoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review X Notification Sign /7 S' X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** Site Plan Review* ~UP/SPRNACNARNVAP/Metes & Bounds - $400 Minor SUB Subdivision* TOTAL FEE $ b S- 0.00 Mailing labels of all property owners within at least 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application -OR- the City can provide this list (Carver'County properties only) for an additional fee to be invoiced to the applicant. . If you would like the City to provide mailing labels, check this box f8I Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. *Twenty-six (26) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8Y2" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet. **Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. Moon Valley Gravel Mine PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: Moon Valley Gravel Mine, Chanhassen, MN (Highway 212) That part of the north half of Section 36, Township 116, LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Ranqe 23, Carver County, MN, which lies southerly of Hennepin County Regional Railroad, northerly of state Highway Number 212 and easterly of Sorensen Addition. accordinq to the recorded plat thereof. TOTAL ACREAGE: 69 acres WETLANDS PRESENT: xx YES NO PRESENT ZONING: A 2, B F REQUESTED ZONING: Guided Residential medium/high density and PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: Office/Industrial REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: Residential medium/hiqh density & office/commercial/Industrial REASON FOR REQUEST: Slope restoration and preparation of Site for uses outlined in guide plan. This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.. The city hereby notifies the applicant that if development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review, the city requires an automatic 60-day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant. 7-- /0 /I f/' . a~~~ ~~£It~t (0.. ~ <>..) ~ -t.. P r c- J ~ ð f- Date . ". r . - nÐo.... u qJ\~ ~r()~ :J;--~ ~~t~/ J ~W 7~/V¿'f/ ,..)Qnature of Fee Owne ~ CH -þ...~ pr e.. J " ~ tÞ T . Date ~~V,~ MOD^- v~!I~ ~~Î-Lð~~+-'" Application Received on 7/' V f 0 L( Fee Paid C750 . Ð'D Receipt No. D W 5ZS-¡ The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If notcontacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. G:\plan\forms\Development Review Application.DOC rrJ The Pemtom Land Company 7597 ANAGRAM DRIVE CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEtVED EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55344 (952)937-07160 FAX (952) 937-8635 JUL 21 2004 CHANHASSEN PLA'NNING DEPT TO: Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council, Chairperson and Members of the Planning Board and Professional Staff - City of Chanhassen SUBJECT: Moon Valley DA'fE: July 20, 2004 We are pleased to present to you a proposal for the Moon Valley Gravel Pit restoration. BACKGROUND: The Moon Valley Property, for you history types, was one of the early downhill ski areas developed in the fifties with a rope tow. The rope tow used an old tractor engine with pulleys made from car tire rims mounted on poles. Subsequent to that, the owners mined the rich gravel prevalent on the Minnesota River Bluff. The pit has also housed a high-powered rifle, pistol, and trap range. The proposal is submitted in accordance with the Settlers West Developer's Agreement whereas the current uses would discontinue and a modification to the existing restoration plan would be approved by the City showing the lower plateau being graded in such a way to provide slope stabilization, erosion control measures, and a storm water management plan. The proposal is being presented to the City with the consideration that the area will be rezoned medium/high density residential and office/industrial from its current A2 and BF zoning as guided by the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan. Currently, an end use grading plan prepared by Sathre - Bergquist, Inc.in 1992 (the "1.992 Plan") has been approved by the City. This plan restores all the mined slopes, provides storm water ponding, and provides for approximately 8.5 acres of useable area for future building. This plan proposes grading 3 acres of existing wooded bluff and an additional .9 acres of trees. We do not believe that 8.5 acres of buildable area for medium to high density residential is adequate for this property to meet the goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the 1992 Plan adversely impacts the existing bluff area and results in a circular valley that does not allow for use of the natural beauty prevalent on the site. Therefore, our goal in the design of the submitted Grading Plan is to impact less existing bluff area than the currently approved plan and provide for more buildable area consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The plan we submitted Ineets both of these goals. The useable area has been increased from 8.5 acres to 18 acres, 14 acres east of the creek and 4 acres west of the creek, and the bluff impact is only 2.6 acres instead of 3 acres. The impacted bluff area has been reconfigured to minimize the impact on the aesthetic beauty of the site. The proposed grading plan does impact the existing tree coverage. The proposed plan removes 7.3 acres of trees instead of3.9 acres in the 1992 Plan east of the creek. The grading west of the creek would impact approximately 4.8 acres of trees. We would work with the City to establish a reforestation plan to meet any mitigation requirements of the Tree Ordinance THE PROPERTY: The land area consists of approximately 75 acres of steep slopes straddling a creek meandering southerly to the Minnesota River. Settlers West, a community of 58 homes currently under construction, is located along the northerly boundary. The Eastern portion of the site on the upper plateau abuts land in Eden Prairie that includes Settlers Ridge, a residential community of 220 homes, and the lower mined area of the site abuts the Richard T. Anderson Conservation Area. The entire northwest boundary of the site is along the Hennepin County Regional Railway Corridor. Extensive frontage along Highway 212 defines the southerly boundary of the site. PLAN: The lower area is proposed to be developed per the Comprehensive Plan at a future date when utilities are available to serve this area. The proposed plan at this point in time is to grade the site to create plateaus with average slopes of 4% or less where future medium to high density residential could be constructed in the future, while providing the necessary erosion protection, restoration, and storm water ponding. This grading restoration will prevent further unsightly and detrimental erosion from the site, as it currently exists. The plan as shown provides for attractive views of the Minnesota River Valley. Access will be provided from two points: one along Highway 212 near the existing entrance to the mine area and gun range, and another west of the creek in which a pleasant meandering private road would be constructed in the future traversing the hillside to reach a plateau with a beautiful view of the river valley. Extensive studies are underway regarding trees, topography, bluffs, utility service, wetlands, and storm water. Through the development review and approval process we will work with the City's goals in all of these areas and strive to exceed their vision for the guided uses of this property. We respectfully request your approval of this outstanding new neighborhood. DEVELOPMENT TEAM: The development team will consist of the Pemtom Land Company, Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. and Westwood Professional Services. This is an experienced team with over 100 combined years in the profession of creating high quality neighborhoods throughout the area. DEVELOPER: The Pemtom Land Company has been active in building and developing in the Metropolitan area since 1963. Adjacent neighborhoods created in the vicinity include, Crimson Bay in Chanhassen, Trillium Bay and Eagle Bluff in Minnetrista, Swiss Mountain in Victoria, Wynnfield on Dell Road and Settlers Ridge in Eden Prairie. Other neighborhoods in Eden Prairie include Entrevaux, Kingston Ridge, St. Johns Wood and Normandy Crest. On Lake Minnetonka our neighborhoods include Chimo, McCarthys Woods, Brynmar Place, Carsonwood, and Greenwoods on the Lake. SA THRE-BERGOUIST~ INC.: Sathre-Bergquist will prepare plans, surveys, plats, and engineering works. Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. is a Land Surveying and Engineering firm located in Wayzata, Minnesota. Our firm has been providing planning, engineering, and surveying services for commercial and residential development projects for over 25 years in communities throughout the Metropolitan area. Over the years we have designed and worked with our clients to develop numerous sites in both Chanhassen and Eden Prairie. Our goal as designers and engineers is to work with the natural features of sites to create quality hóme and business sites with appealing streetscapes using curvilinear streets varying in elevation that draw people to these sites. WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: Westwood Professional Services has provided land development consulting services for over 32 years. Westwood's approach to the environment is to provide quality places to live, work, and play while protecting our natural resources to the greatest extent possible. Our team of wetland scientists includes over 35 years of experience in wetland delineations, and mitigation designs. \~\ l~¡ J>n~ ~i~ ¡i' Ç\~~! ~\J~Oi I ª~ ~! ~ ~~~ ~~ ~9 ~ ~ j¡ ~ œ I! ~ ~ I~ Ig I! ~~r ui '~f~1 I ~II ¡ I r ¡ en -< 3: aJ 0 UWi r r ooHlHl m i~loO G) ~8~~! m z i~~ii 0 ---- , ",~' è-~ "\ \ '-... '-... '-... '-... '-... ; ~ i ~ ~. Þ" æ ; ~I ¡ ; ! i ~: ~ i i ¡ i ~ a r- il ~ I d !~ &~ i !~ ~E !I tw i"U E ; t i~ ;~ ~i t g~;~ ~i ~~~I ~!~~ ~ ~ ~ I~~ i~ !I; . ~ i I! !!I! i~l~ B ~ ~ . ~ j; ~~ ~ ~ ~ Ii Šêlt ~iãg ~ '" i 0 ~~ 8~ ~ ~ ~!J ~t JI ""c3i ~ !~ ~ t I~ i! E J ~ ; Ai ~ ~f~ a 2 ~ "'''' ~1! rII 'I ð n s: tiõ1 '" ~ i i il~ ~~ ~ i ~ I lIs ~~~ a ~. ~ t i d ~ t . ;'1 ~z<; ~ ~ ~ ~ 2"' i ~ r: 5~JII s;5 Þ ! = i æA ~ i I ~ ! d! ii~; ~ ¡ g ~~: ! i g ~ii ini~ I ~' I ¡~ i ~ ¡ i j~1 ~I ""' i ; ~I ~ .,' I!g h~ i ~ ä' ~ ~ i ~ I ~li ~li ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ t ~~m ~~~ ! ~'~ ..~ ~2 '" \ If lE.!i J3 lô~, I: 1:;¡ Ii õli 7 ~ \ j '",' t u !f1f ~ ¡ "~4 d ~ . W~& I I ¡ li ( ) u : ~ ~ @ ~... f! " -' t " ~~ I!: ~ r .'~ ; i' _ ~~. !"~ J'~ 8 If ~l::. ; ~f ~~§ :i l~ i i ~ ~-~ :¡; ~ Vi Ö ~ - , "--- _.. -- - - to -< ~JI{t\I)IIJlJ tl/<AI~bCjl . f\r~lJ ¡ (\(J:,I( I(J CuNTF-<OL PI AN MOON VALLEY GRAVEL MINE CHANHASSEN,MINNESOTA ....+t,t."s SIJ't~ ~ ~ l 0 '" ~ SA THRE-BERGQUIS~L~C. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYIATA, MN ~5391 (952)471Hj()()() ~~.. -::: ,/ i (.'1- ++ ('Is p\.t THE PEMTOM LAND COMPANY ~\"g c.¡~ ø~ 'G tIJ 1946 ... ~ C/tlJ O"lJfy S\~ 219 East Frontage Road Waconia, MN 55387 Phone: 952-442-5101 Fax: 952-442-5497 COIISERVArlOIl DISTIICT http://www.co.carver.mn.us/SW CD/S W CD main.html Mission Statenlellt: To provide leadership in COllsenJation and teach stetvardship of the soil, tvater, and related resources throuRh a balanced, cooperative prORranl that protects, restores, and inzproves those resources. August 4, 2004 Robert Generous, Senior Planner City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Moon Valley Gravel Mine Restoration Mr. Generous: The SWCD has reviewed the Moon Valley Gravel Mine Restoration plan. Please consider the following erosion control recommendations and comments. This site poses very challenging erosion and sediment control management. Erosion Control 1. If feasible, it is recommended to terrace the northern-most slope. In some areas the slope of 2.5 to 1 is over 500 feet long; controlling erosion and long term stability is going to be difficult. The engineers should take a look at the slope and determine the feasibility of breaking up the length of slope permanently. 2. Phasing is a very important management tool for erosion control. Stabilization of the toe (first 150 feet of the slope) is needed immediately upon final grade. Stabilization will need to be done in phases. Large portions of the site should not be left exposed over weekends or during forecasted heavy rains. 3. The slopes should be tracked with a dozer at all times. The dozer should be run perpendicular to the slope to track the slope. Tracking the slope is a passive, cheap erosion control method. 4. The NW 'corner' of the slope will be an area of instability because stormwater will concentrate in the swale and possibly form a gulley. This area is north of soil boring 18, south of soil boring 14 and in-between soil borings 10 and 15. A terrace, turf reinforcement mat and slope drain will likely be needed in this area to promote long term stability. 5. Due to the steep slopes and long runs of the slope, straw fiber rolls may be needed to aid in stabilization of all the slopes with the MN DOT Category 3, 2S wood fiber blankets. The fiber rolls would help break up the length of slope and minimize erosion potential of the slope with the AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER erosion control blankets. Please see attached straw fiber roll detail for a visual representation. Six-inch fiber rolls are needed every 15 to 20 feet. See attached fact sheet. 6. Proper blanket application is crucial for this site. The blankets must make 100% contact with the soil and stapled according to manufactures specifications. The staple pattern is vital to proper blanket function. The blankets should be head trenched as well. 7. Geotextile and riprap or geogrids or other approved stabilization is needed to provide toe protection; there is a chance the toe of the 2.5 to 1 may start head cutting without toe protection. 8. The seed mix specified (MN DOT 500) should be changed to MN DOT Native mix 340 (Sandy Mid Height, dry conditions -i.e. south facing slope). 16 pounds per acre application rate is recommended. 20 pounds per acre is needed for hydoseeding or broadcasting. 9. Depending on the final soil used, blanket application may be difficult. If the soil is too sandy, stapling the blanket over long runs will be futile. 'Terracing' blankets or using strips of blankets with a heavy application of the seed mix (20 pounds per acre) and hydromulch will be needed. Sediment Control 1. The silt fence should be installed at least 25 feet away from the toe of the slope to provide storage and allow the silt fence to function properly. 2. As stated on the plan, the temporary sediment basins must be installed prior to grading activities. Berms may be needed to divert runoff into the basins along 212. Stormwater Management Subsurface stormwater movement should be considered with surface movement of stormwater. When considering stormwater management, installation of draintile at the toe should be considered to reduce any future possibility of sloughing due to saturation from ground water or slope seepage. If there are any questions please call the SWCD office Sincerely, Aaron Mlynek, CPESC Urban Conservation Technician cc. Matt Saam, City of Chanhassen Lori Haak, City of Chanhassen .:C) '-.,."" '\ "'- ~__"_ .-,..-_.0...1.-.. .,,""~......._......._._.......,~"-_.~..__.. '.,.,..~..__..'____.'_ /'-., ~~ I: ...'.,. /)1''':>,:-.:". ....., .<,¡..:"~..~.......~ rl ..... f.\.;~~~~~~~ to ·_L~-,;;J ç'3-8m.) ". .... ~ .'. .-.", ~~:: .:..../>::{>;, "'-..., I ., "" .....,...),:~:~~. .............. .' p ..(¿ ~~... y ?:~~:~~~~_... /IJ " ~¿~?:~~. -:-- J t" SPA ClllG' D£PDVDS<:?> /, (ì ttl :::.-; (JlL 7!}"P E ,~1l,,rD . :'f' /'.; .<;:,,+:,.^> .h . ,¡~ . "., -. r¡: [. p, '¡:' -- - . .,.... .... "<:". "':::>:~~ .')(,.J........ -~ t., ; ~ u,.~.')_':; l ,/,~t<~~ .,"'-- 5LDiME.V~ o.4)G'AN/C MAl/tilT, ..., ,A.;...... ....../ ...t,/I/D ."'-if, r..li /f; .-S~tc:çt..).i) .14 {:;'.C." , .' .:-,,::~ ~. ':-<!.~. ..... v r. . À._ F (-:A.'D'.r ¿,.':t?£D B£I-l/..~/¡; .T/-lt- ~()l ¡.S: '%~~.r=..~.. '.. .,:~¿~~\..I " ~~)-"- iF . . ".' ......~~." ~._-. Þ' \ .~ ~~ ~ »~ "'<{{ "- , .,/.;.....y t'. <.<~~:~~ SITRA ~t" ROl_lS ltJIL/.5T Bi- .PlA,r...·flJ " ¡ar'.. ~ /.....)~:: ~ALO/VG .SL OIGE COlv'TOt./RS ". .... /~I .;~;)/.. 1/ ,'I L l ~.~c: ..~~-_......---.-.\ /. L I ,. f ..._-'---J L*o- ( ;, \ ". I <:." , t '-...] I .....·\1 ~:~'Jk..._ ',~ .... /) ,,/ - ( : ... «~~~:::~~~~?~ r " ~~')-:.~L~-- \\ it/~ x.... \, .. / '\ .~ I I ,)- .... <~."~.' ./.. .--.-,.\ \_-,-,.~.-. ...-. _.,.,.../ .~.:~'''. w '- \.:x;..?, .'\)r~~ -- r :-~l~~:;;:?~~-t-~;~(;~~~~&;, - l"/\ . .' I . . 1.1 I' ,',{ 1 I.. \ .' ¡! 1.....- :'-, /1 I. ..~-; ,7:4/(E ~ ,,'le} rf:. : ' :::J () :i ... 3't - 4' ·~I ·""'.'K""w,",·~" ....__ ~ì·. .( 1.. 2~n:~IìÍ~' I ~~:- ~.. ~. _d-:.4:-~' /~'i . Jj"xx .. ...".-<::;0'« ~~~, '; 1~tJ/- ..., 'Yf"t, ·~*\:·::.(:;;1 1.-.-1"í1. 1._, t' .' ~... . ..... ~ i.-I ~~I... '\ "',~~.' ¡ .4.-' r I .'. ~ ;.("«.. .... . .I~.'¡;"- /,! "'. --'j ~. .?-q~ " I' I~" 'I I .. · 'J' .Aa/A C'Fl'\l T .¡;J()L L ._~ .5~"7~.4 L L \L 't .TlGii~TL :..." AB¿(T -'1 . " .........r:'. , ....:"~: ..... -""\ \.\ ,~ V .~~;~>~ ·1 .... .~..)~. '.. . r '\ -,,/;. :...., . ~ J/ /.....-; ." ~~ '- " ". .... <~~ .~^.:.,.,)~~~ </,(- .~~)~.. I . '. Jþ,;,:.... . ;~ ,~~ ~~ -;rr,t ¡...- ,,,. ''''.7.5- 1 ;J5rt;'/,rll ..' ."1.... /-- ....) _) -..". .'\'~~~'" /' ..... ....\..... " ::~·::'I~~::...·.·.r.:>,.~:.....~.)~,..;)("\,. -r:{fì.... //--;-';;1:~'~' ;.;,:~~:~ ;, '-. . . . .r I '\.. \, : ',..I ~ .. ..:. w L· ..r:. ...... L·, .f I 1 ,~ ".,./ " ...:~:".., ...\·';..\\~I " ..... ". : I~,,"""':;tl'- ./ . -....:: ,/ ......... "'-. .. ~ . " I _..- -...-, . ~ , 14,.,- I~·.. .~....~ ~-'- I, 'w"" 1,.\. }.. ... . \ ~. \. .'JM~V> ·)..,..-r,"_~Y:f >...... a·'.·· ---..,..,-"-' "'<,.-.<:"'~~.."" ,.<;:'/ ' . .;':~~:~:ì:~~~~.~ ·'·l~.> >/.,'............._. J.::'/ " ,r' r In . r' ,'" I <'. T.. ~ k··C ~', ¡Ai~ 11- I..... ....1 (.....) 'Í ! ¿. ".- .......- J ..\., ¿ ...::~l?7.f?ì../ ¡,"'/I:) ,T 7,-, itl 1...1 ..':7c:-4LE ¡ r..: .' l. .S ll?4 UI /?CJl L //í/Sl:-4l,L.4 T/Ol,/ .Rt-C)Lh:R~::.S~ l:4:1:- l:":/ .A-~::~M.t/\·JT ..4/~.'l) .ç:t{:'(/.9f:- ..S·lAl(ll/(~~ (Jl- /l-ll:.. ..~1()LL /~,l ..4 .Tl1t"íV'C~~~ ...J u --~..Y (~5 - .t ¿'t/rriJ'77J<) DEE.~ L'J{.//...; (},~/ (:" :"-;1'// (J Lj~lT: l?(/:·It/I:Jl-·¡:- .,tiLlS T /vC) T BE ..¡J.L L c.J tiED .r:C;' l7L//I,/ L/.I~/D E/? C',i:(' .4Rt]t..ltlE' l?C'L L. f.:J c:. "" r~...E: ~T~YRèt.L ,.r~ J ". , STRl\ "'T I{() LIJS \ \,.. ) ',", ,-" ....,11' -'~"W:':~~"""'-:"'»~'~:~.;-~'>:-:.:-.~ ' ___...__..._ _,~..-.·."*.-.........·""-w..,,,·, '* ':i··- -,,:: ,,-~.'. .. - ,',,jþ;'::,, -;- -~. ',". ....."._;,i:..~.w....,..."...~".._...__,.... .........·.·_·_.......».·_·.~__·"'-w_,·_y....·_·_:·__ ,..- ..... .- .// '*.~ ..L-=-,-- .r----~---L- I~j....p-~'--~ ,../ ..._,":¥:-~ - '~~C'1~ ('¡-:;;¡:-~~_ ....' /' ---r --- -,-- -~ -~.!::.£i~}-Æt4I..../-:----- "*. ~¥ l ~::.~: __-;~~~~*-_,__ - -:..r·~~~7------____,_ ~./ / _.-- - -. __ -- - ;{"'- ..,.... -- ..r . -'"'7'v- --- .."-, '--7--- k'~__ ~._~::.~ ':::~_ .~~:";.:~.-;--;....---.--,- '-"""~ --;~..,_f::...: I ITr 7_- - --, ...-" .-- - .J' .. . - - --. ~ - -- rf;: - _ -- _-.;;:r;. ..- -... N - .-- ¥It' I . 'ð' _' ..~.J,'''',ii ..-. / --=~ .... - --...- --....--:..,- -~:- _. þ_ -:... ....:>... /?"- ..., ;<-.;J...~.< ./""'. '" . I ""\e: l ,. ~---- .,..- ... . ~". - . - .:: - - - - - ~,........ .-' - .....Jr ...-:-.-::.-.;,:... . ~ "" / ... .r..... / / J¡( -f1t-:".r:~: - -~.::- ;~~_.::: '- .... - _ ~I.' ,(fj:~~-, ~ ,~\\\\....:.".,,* I' (",t \" · I ' I/' --- r "'W.-J' ---......- -...... ..-r"~:2¿. '* 1 f-'" ~'\ lJ~-'/' \...... I // (' / i,l -.7?77·::::"'--_,_ ---- .---~<~~.~~þ-~r~:'.. ~ '''"''I··'· - '/l I / I I It' -~ ,_-"t., ~'" ... '.''''' ~--...). " 1"',\" '.-.". / r 11 ) I . . I I r~· '.... '. f' , . '. '" .,/ :.. ". .... . QI .. '"!t..l I ir-\ I' I / l I' I l .. .' "'....'" ..:"i /' ,,/ .,:-".-' ...... ,,:.... ",' ../' .:'", '. I~I // ¡ wi ... ' /1' I l /,/ / ./i/ / (/ ,./~"<...:./ ..~<:. ....~.../.../<.. \:..<,......' ,'..<. ".'.<' t ""'-.... -......._ , I . I II, .l.. I /. '\¡'" '- "'./,:\. " "'.:' '. "', "<' .'. '. \J ...... I" ¡" 1/ I¡I/ · f l./ /:/ ('/~l.. >..~....>..~....,~>/:....;\,*' ..·>i"·~>..,. '''. ./" / L>' t ' . l/ f ,/ / / /,1 II' ,........:~ ......'. .I" <,"" £/" ....,.....,.:. ¡-...,/ ¿' I,' . II .l/ /' l i;4 ,/ l i,... ", '"'' /~ """ "" ''\'< ...... . t. i I If' I '/ · II / '" " ".~ '\ "'."'./ .... " ---J__./ I II i,/ ~ "" ,1.. · II .......'.>./'/-"".../'''>, ,},." . '-1 t, II J " .' / ( r l 1,1 .It .¡ ~ ." /'. ".... .... ,. ./ I I I .......... I II !. ,. ,. l/,i ..' 't"~./ I" ".I......." I J I l ,I It"", .... '-". .~ ..~I! l .I l.l l -., . 'f r I }I / ,I r r' l.~ ":..'''f.¡.. ...... ".,'.,: I \ }. ,/ ,/ r / / {::) II / / / · ¡ /:" / ,../'\ >" .----_l__. . \!.-" ' il' , ""-...... / l / /',.' l / I:...· "(r'/ .,,<.1'...::/ // -'-- _ . /' l/ "", / // . ... i,l l /. "" '~., f..·\"" ", r - -'-==~ . / l ,- t .. / / .' r .I ; r . 1/' "'>."'" ~,./'>'" .\. /......-ì I l/ ......, ... / ,. / /.. (1./ /)./P' ,,>' /" ,,../ /'>- .... /I/":¡ . ¡··l/ l - ,/ 1/ ~.. /... / .. " /l 1',' .,<, "....... ...... .,<, .. '---- I l' (} " ./ I' .' / I I ,. .~J .<..Ifr t ¡ l'Ir...·< '-i.\ '"'' '<. .... -- -___ *..'--; ;,' ...... / / "',Il .,.....- ?,r-¡ .c. ~ l / t ". "...i....~... ....., ..>' ";",. ---}..... ~.,../ -.......... I l / / l / ('-" L··~?'J..,..,·t ) /I./-·.,;i .,..... ,>"'/t'/ / ...----..... l / .I J // · .,-../ / /. """" ."';<: "<,\,;./ .'.' l 7'. tI'l . / I /1,( '.. .'....\ ......'...~ ,./' ./ ,// l ~l//. /¿;~~~~<~:>~~?~::" l f I I I ... '- . ,""--_ f... If. '. .', .. " .'. '. " ,. ,I I li----...::::...---- r:- , .¡ ¡". '> "'~ ..... "" '. , l l .Ii I /1 ----=-....',/1. >" ,.., .... ~. ......., , . I I'" /,., -'''.J"' " ../., ./..( ../ / I i/) A W '1/ / f / " 1/....',..,·......,. ",.;" l · ·i,.',i .. j... , / ....A I / I .·'l,'··... ....,.":'" ""M," I ... ., .....,,., ). , / l . l I I ,. ,>", ",,/ >.,' / l ¡. *'...I(J.t77m t .....( 1/ r // ,,/ .>,..,.." ./ ..:- I, ~.") I /L-R / A 6 /' / I' '-.. / II .. l/....··...· ...< "":" !,"'/.." In . ,...J~..,.. d...j .. I / .. ... ~ l./. .....\.. ..../ ,/ ./ f/I I' // l~:S>:>'··:::'·· ~ 6 ..... (JjOrr}/?v \¡¡[ì ....'OJ l f · /1 l ~ Ii ¡ 1'.....'.{.,/ II ~ / ( ./ .... l . l,/ i'l:' .....,... "..:' - ·,:-;:;1 zo' ... ..... .... · ... / /' ¡ A /1' ¿", l,·'·f '~'''''' '. ,~ { It ·'1· I,' ., ( q ..f ".,.,)rr, · / / // I / .....; I // .< /" '. , . 1 I .' ~ .' J l' I " , '..,t L____.. / ,// / /'/' f ,//".',.....:.:. I __a '1,' -(......., La ...1 -~ - " (I '" . I .. Il·'. '" l '!... .'/' L ......u _ .'-'.~ --.L._í~.¡:__-LW/j___ /ø::~:~'~::::: r "'1 (4ún-~(/}):! ..~, "--,- ~-------!../J~/.../.~.,....>... f-' ì~ .~ ~ ---~~7.~~~~:~~~.:~~~;::>( êIAEt];~ [SOMETRIC~ 'lIEW '-':" ,<a ....., "'~,.,< """ "~<. ~..,~--- ....,. \:~.,," '''. " r'·· '.,' . i'l' J' , ,V4l..5;!;.EJ L·4.j~1 ¡'·:t~-*rs· ,~S:4 0 Lll. l';' BE iNSTALLED ~·:ER.TIc.4LL ,.., /)(J ~~li;'(5J,' O,D F ~ .J¡ 1"YPICAL SLOPE _._:~........_...",.-.:..,....,...-".,.....,~~.;.,.....- ....... STAB 1,JI Z~t\, TI (}.:\f r 4"'-1 ~I 1 .. . --., -. . ...' l. ~~. ".,.... J . ". If ....... { . 0' " -- ...._--- - ..a'4' ...... '" -~ ..... '"" ". \~ .------.-...., ! I, r~-'~~ , .....'" -1 .~'." ----,..' ,.'/"~ SOIL ·....<·/'·'··4 .. .. ..., '\. l~j{J,Tt5~¡ I ..,:: ::i :::J ':J i'l ~ l. SI,:...~F'C 2.~L.../?¡-;~c..~t- 5l-l.L.LL BE ..e-liEF ()I~ /?L}C.~A-:5., (.~t.... (]{J.S:. .5·llC~I(~::'· ..4/l/) ,C;:'L?A.S-5~. ..tlA .~5~.···/ []¿:4lV;(US Sl/ÁLL J;"';4 ~..£ {i(Jt?D S()/L 1~·0~,/¡il""1{7.7~ S'C;-4l£ '~í"(..:~[ 7;1 .~ L-' ¿), A 1C;¡c.¿. :r" ,cz....4 (-':lj'I,II::"~ rl:\S~J .i.~A l ~/l~\i.T .<;l-£ £'lllt/G' 51:.-:-.r;~ì:R £" B LA.l./}(' ETI-C;;, ~ ã -:. EROSION BLANKETS & Tl}RF REINFO,RCE~{ENrr Aslt\TS SLOPE INSTALLATION I I _J --=- ('"'' ðJ "J, LA Y' Eï~.L /tl:Jr.·!:.7:...~· L {){)::..~£ L ),., ..4/v'lJ ~-:;T4 ifE f...Jl? 5 TA P LE TO it-I;: l:í\/7.i1// { [J//il:. .t..: l {.~(?I\ll.·4 ~",7 t'4'lll-! /l-It-' S·{)ll.~ /)() i~¡l))T :.:.-:T.R£.Tc..:."/ (~~) '~- f,b~,:, ..§~~.t(-S~·~ A u g, 6. 2 I~) IJ 4 1 2 : 4 . P rv1 LMRWD \J 0 . '2 5 4 :':. .. 2/4 Memo jJ1j BOt1estrco ..... Rosene G Anc1erJlk & '\J' AS$odate $ i¡ng""tI'~ & ^rcl'1t~<:ts Project Name: Moon Valley Gravel Mine Client: Lower Minnesota River Watershed District To: Terry Schwalbe File No: 1460-04-000 From: Dan Edgerton Date: August 4, 2004 Re." Engineering Review of Developnlent Proposal This n1emo sumnlarìzes an engineering review of the grading. drainage, and erosion control plan for the Moon Valley Gravel Mine located in Chanhassen, Minnesota. The plans that were reviewed included the grading, drainaget and erosion control plan dated July! 161 2004, and a Stormwater Calculations report dated July 21 2004. Both were prepared by the Sathre-Bergquist firm. Hydrology and water quantity-related comments are as follows: 1 - The curve number selectíon of 69 for existing conditions seems high given the sandy soils prevalent on the site. The curve number should be lowered to 61 to better reflect current site conditions. 2. The curve number selected for proposed land use conditions appears low. (CN=76) For clarity and to better model small storm runoff from the site, the proposed medium density/high density residential areas should be modeled separately from the overall watersheds, rather than lumping them together. This will assist in future reviews in determining if the proposed development is consistent with the current proposal. 3. Times of concentration used in the model from the sheetflow calculations appear to be too long, resulting in underestimated peak discharges. The Manning's un" value used in the calculations corresponds to dense grass conditions, which are likely optimistic given the slopes of the site. A better estimate can be made using either short grass or unpaved conditions to be conservative, especially given the steep slopes on the project site_ 4. Overall, the rate controls provided by the proposed ponds meets the 10 year and 100 year predevelopment discharge rates. However, it does not meet the 2-year predevelopment discharge rate. This could be aCGomnlodated by installing a small orifice and overflow weir outlet control structure without drasticalfy raising the high water levels from the 10 and 100 year events. Changes resulting from comments #1-3 may change these results. 5. Drainage to Pond 1 from a portion of WS-5P is not accounted for in the rate control calculations provided for Pond 1. Although this area is not proposed for development, runoff from this area will affect pond operation. Bon9stroo, Rosener Anderllk and AssocÎatos, Inc. www.bonestroo.com St. Paul Offlce= 2335 Wost Highway 36 St, Paull MN 55113 Phone: 6~1-636-4600 C~",· tU:-1 ~,)t::: -1':11-1 Milwaukee Office; 1516 West Mequon Road Mequon. WI 53092 Phon~: 262-2414466 Rochester Office: 112 70, Street NE Rochester. MN 55906 Phone: 507..282~2100 Willmar Office: 205 5th Street SW Willmar, MN 56201 Phone: 320-214-9557 St. Cloud Offlce= 3721 23~ Street S St. Cloud, MN 56301 Phone: 320-2514~53 Grayslake Office: 888 East Belvidere Rosd Grèlyslake, IL 60030 Phono: 847-548-6774 c^'" r'Jc"1 "A 1 04""1 r-_... 1:'''"'' r.~^ "'.-I ^^ .- ~"""'..'^.~^ - --- --. ---- A u g. 6, 2 0 !J 4 1 2 : 4 . P Iv) LMRWD I\J 0 . '2 ~) 4 '¡:, _ì /4 Memo ~l1j Bonestro( e Rosene ~ And~rfik ð . \J 1 AS50dat~~ E()Qlne-~r': ~ Arenitcc:r Modeling of peak flows and rate control for the 2, 10, and 100 year events should be re-evaluated with a revised watershed for Pond 1. 6. Watershed WS...1 P does not have clearly defined drainage boundaries. Although it does not enter the portion of the síte that is to be regarded, it will need to be better defined in order to quantify whether or not flooding will occur over TH212. 7_ The proposed drainage diagram appears to show runoff from the Settlers West Development on top of the bluff draining to a concentrated point at the top of the proposed 2.5 : 1 constructed slopes- These concentrated flows must be avoided and prevented in order to prevent severe erosion of the steep slopes. Runoff may need to be piped down the face of the slope at this location- 8. The west end of watershed WS-3P will naturally drain to the channel/wetland to the west while the ultimate proposed plan indicates it will be directed east to Pond 2. Water quality treatment should be provided prior to discharging to the channel/wetland complex. A temporary sediment basin may need to be installed in this location until final development occurs and redirects runoff to Pond 2. 9. it is not clear how runoff from watershed WS-6P will be directed to the proposed Pond 1. The grading plans show sheet fiow to the southl where it will intersect the proposed site access road. Based solely on contours, ìt appears runoff wiU sheetflow over the road and then will continue on to TH 212. Details regarding how water will be directed to Pond 1 should be included for review. 1 Q. No details regarding the proposed pond outlets were submitted for review. At a minimum, they must provide skimming up to the 5-year storm event. 11. The plans do not make it clear how runoff from watershed WS-5P leaves the site. High water levels at any proposed or current outlet may affect the high water levels in Pond 1. 12. The steep slopes proposed for the site (2.5H: 1 V) will require substantial efforts be placed on erosion control during construction and vegetation establishment. The site should be thoroughly reviewed for erosion control measures as the current single lines of silt fence ,shown on the plan are likely not enough given the height and length of the proposed slopes. Water quality related comments are as follows: 13. The stormwater ponds should be designed to achieve a 600/0 reduction in average annual phosphorus loads. No details regarding the proposed nutrient removal efficiency of the ponds were provided. 14. Pond 1 appears to have a wet volume of 0.71 acre-feet and a mean depth of 2.45 feet. The mininlunl reconlmended mean depth is 3 feet for a water quality pond, in order to prevent scour and re-suspension of captured sediment. Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlil< and AssocIates, Inc. www"bon9stroo.com St.. Paul Office: Milwaukge Office: Rochester Office: Will mar Offlce: Offi ce: 2335 West Highway 36 1516 West MeQlJOn Road 112 i'" Street NE 205 5th Street SW Road 51. PauL MN 55113 Mequot1, WI 53092 Rochester, MN 55906 Wlltmar, MN 56201 Phone: 651-636-4600 Phone~ 262-241-4466 Phone: 507-282..2100 Phone: 320-214'-9557 61ì4 ._... DC,;! ø~O .. ').,.., c."" ")~,)~A"_AQf\1 ç'~y" ~07-?A?-:H()() ~~X' ~?O·214-945B St. Cloud Office: Grayslake 3721 23rd Street S 888 East Belvidere St. Cloud, MN 56301 Phone; 320-2514553 Grayslake. IL 60030 Phone: 847-548- Fax: 320~251~6252 Fax: 847-548-6919 .1, , ,.,' M.! Ô . t~. 2 IJ D 4 1 2 : 4 1 P Iv1 LMRWD I\J I) , 2 ~) 4 :~: 4/4 Memo 1 l~ '~J BOne:5tr, O( g Rosene ~ AnderUk ~ 1 \J' A~soci~te: Engfn~~rs & .A.rct.lcec[ 15. The wet volume of Pond 1 is sufficient to retain the runoff from a 2.5-inch storm over the watershed WS-6A However, grading plans reflect that a portion of drainage from watershed WS-5P will be routed into Pond 1. Although this area is not proposed for development. it is important to capture the runoff contribution from this area for water quantity and quality calculations (see comment number 5). The drainage area routed to Pond 1 must be clarified and the wet volume must be equivalent or greater to the volume of runoff from a 2.5-inch storm over the tributary area. Refer to comment number 2 regarding curve number modeling when re-calculating wet vol urnes. 16. Pond 2 appears to have a wet volume of 3.68 acre-feet and a mean depth of 3.83 feet. These parameters appear satisfactory. However, refer to comment number 2 regarding curve number modelìng to verify wet volume requirements are met. In addition, refer to comment number 8 regarding the drainage area to Pond 2; the calculated drainage area to Pond 2 should be re-evaluated. 17. Overall. given the intent of the development (residential) and sandy nature of the existing soils, alternative stormwater management approaches (such as Infiltration to reduce runoff volume) are encouraged for this proposed development. Bonestroo, Rosene, Andorlík and Associates, Inc. www.bonøstroo.com St. P~I.II OffiCê: M IJwau kee OffiC9: Rochoste( Office: WillmC1t Office: Office: 2335 West Hìghway 36 1516 West Mequon Road 112 7r1\ Street NE 205 5th Street SW Road St. Paul, MN 55113 Mequon. WI 53092 Rochester, MN 55906 Wmm3T, MN 56201 Phone: 651..636-4600 Phone; 262-241-4466 Phone; 507-282-2100 Phone~ 320-214-9557 6774 ~Q"". ~~1_~~~_1~11 c:: '" u . I'>C ') I') A 04 ... rH'\ 04 r- _. .. ~".... "'''' ~ ^.. """ '"' -- --- -.. - .-. 51. Cloud Office: Grayslake 3721 23rd Street S B88 East Belvidere St. Clóud. MN 56301 Grays/ake, IL 60030 Phone: 320..251-4553 Phone~ 847-548- ~f~\~NESI°t;¡ ~ l 0 ~ ~ ~1i l OF TRÞ.~" Minnesota Department of Transportation !~~ ~,' i :~~~~ V '~~ t :. Metropolitan Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road 82 Roseville, MN 55113 i_· 004 ,~UG 0 ~~ <.: \'r y t. August 6, 2004 Sharmeen AI-Jaff Planning Department, City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 SUBJECT: Moon Valley Gravel Mine Restoration, S04-067 North side ofTH 212 at West (1/4 mile) Limit ofChanhassen Chanhassen, Carver Co. Contro] Section 1013 Dear Ms. AI-Jaff: Thank you for the opportunity to review the above-referenced site plan. The Minnesota Department of Transportation's (MnJDOT's) functional engineering units and related areas have reviewed the plan. Please address the following issues before any further development: · Pond #2 and possibly Pond #1 outlet into TH 212 right-of-way. Therefore a drainage permit will be required. MnJDOT has received the drainage comps and maps and will retain them for use when reviewing the drainage permit. Please direct questions concerning this issue to Derek Beauduy (651-634-2233) of Mn/DOT's Water Resources section. · Since the intended long term use of this property is residential, please submit detailed information on any proposed access to TH 212 at the very early stages of the development process. Early Mn/DOT involvement in identifying a preferred access location will assure that safety and site distance issues are addressed. This will help avoid redesign work later in the development process. Please direct questions concerning this issue to Area Engineer L.ynn Clarkowski (651-634-2103). · Any use of or work within Mn/DOT right of way requires a permit. Please direct questions regarding permit applications to Keith VanWagner (651-582-1443) of MnJDOT's Permits section. As a reminder, please address all initial future correspondence for developlllent activity such as plats and site plans to: Development Reviews Coordinator MnJDOT - Metro Division Waters Edge An equal opportunity employer- 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, Minnesota 55113 MnlDOT document submittal guidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats and two (2) copies of other review documents including site plans. Failure to provide three (3) copies of a plat and/or two (2) copies of other review documents will make a submittal incomplete and delay MnlDOT's review and response to development proposals. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in providing the necessary number of copies, as this will prevent us from having to delay and/or return incomplete submittals. If you have any questions concerning this review please feel free to contact me at (651) 582-1548. Copy: Roger Gustafson / Carver County Engineer Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. Blind Copy: Derek Beauduy Lynn Clarkowski Keith VanWagner Ann Braden I Metropolitan Council Mn/DOT LGL File - Chanhassen Mn/DOT Division File CS 1002 Roger Gustafson Carver County Engineer PO Box 300 Cologne, MN 55322 Sathre-Berquist, Inc. 150 South Broadway Wayzata, MN 55391 CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDA VIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SSe COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on August 5, 2004, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for the Moon Valley Gravel Mine IUP - Planning Case No. 04-27 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. Subscribed and sworn to before me this :)fh day of -.f} lj I ì'Sf- , 2004. 0) c: ;:; (1) (1) ~ O)c: c: 0 '- U) as.!!! (1) E J:E u 0 .cO ~O) a.c: 't-c: o c: (1) CO ua. ., o c: Z(1) tn tn as .c c: as .c o ., (1) (1) ~ c: 0)0 .= tn '- tn m E J:E u 0 .cO ~O) a.c: 't-c: o c: (1) as ua. ., o c: Z(1) tn tn as .c c: as .c o -0(5 C 'C rot) 50 :æ2 > ro ~t) xW CD- -0 ci) ~ >.~ ª ëñ-o:J ã)roo E ~ ~.§, roo« ~~-o ggE~ ....... r---. ~ 0 1 -- r---. CD N -æ cñ Q.. ~ ~Q;~CD g.c::J§- C\J E E ~ ro ._ 0.. r---.£~c 020 t) Cc :J c.Q ro-æ ~ ~ o 0 ~ +-oJ t)~ CD ~ :JCD r---. CD CJ 0.. C\J C\J :J CD 0 «I ~ t-Oa:Cñ 0 (1) E ¡:: c .2 ~... ! ~ co 0 C..J 0) c: -0(5 æ'c c .~ 00 ~2 > ro ~t) xW CD- -0 ci) ~ >.~ ª ã5-o:J ã)roo E ~ Œ'§, roo« ~~-o ggE~ ....... r---. ~ 0 1 -- r---. CD N -æ (/)- (L ~ ~ ~ CD CD OCD(/)o.. o.c::Je C\JEEo.. ro "_ r---.£~c 020 t) Cc :J c .Q ro-æ ~ ~ o 0 ~t) t)~ -oI~O) r---. ~ CJ 0.. C\J C\J :J+-oJO)oc::(~ t-Oa:Cñ 0 (1) E ¡:: c .2 ~... $ ~ co 0 C..J co U) o 0. o ~ a. co U) o 0- o ~ a. -g -0 CD 0)0 CDO£ ~ 0- £ 0 +-oJ \V +-oJ £ -0 (f) +-oJ~ro = g> 6.8~ o "~ .c £ £ - ro 0) == t LL :J 'CD 3= o 0 0 c .~ oCO ~CDro .s 15 - E £ £ _ ro c Q) ~+-oJO ~ e.Q .~.2 E CD +-oJ - .~ õ .~ e £ ~ ro 'ëi3 -0 c ~ CD a: -0 0 +-oJ ci) +-oJ CD « :Ë+-oJ:Jc(/) ~ ~ C ~.~ c.:;:; 0) c 0 'õ O).~ CD C o (/) C C CD'§ '5> c ~·c 'ëi3 E 0 CD CD ~ ·ëñ ro +-oJ CD = ~ ~~ ~ ~ -g :5 ~ >+-oJ~ (1)000) ,.... ~ 0 > :.= +-oJ C £ 10... ..J (1) .c -0 . C +-oJ 0o+-oJ ~:JC:J£ o 0 (/) (1) 0.. ro 0 0) ~ c æ ==.~ t) . 5 oð "6.. -0 S £ CD (5 .c (/) CD C ~ :J CD +-oJ Q; C ro .!! 0 CJ' 0 0) .- c C\J CD CD ~ c 3= 0) ~ ns (/) ~ o..·c N I C\J Eo_(/) (/) ro ~ c 0.. +-oJ .- CD CDoro 0:Jæ££ .g £ 3= - ~ 0.. 0 +-oJ 0 -æ "5 -á.~ g CD a. 5 ~ CD 0·- ~ - £ o...c :J a)(f)IO<ct-roroo.. .! ¡¡: >-c ~ 0 (1)+: 0. co o (J ~ 0 a...J -g -0 0) CDO 0)0£ -æo- £ o +-oJ £-0 êï5 0) "5 0 ro ~c o.c~ o "~ .c £ £ - ro 0) == t LL :J 'ã) 3= o 0 0 c .~ gc~ ~CDro - -0 - E £ O£ -roc Q)~+-oJ (/)0) P.Q CJ .E E CD - ~cO£(/) (¡j ~ '6 'g.- ~ +-' g- CD a: ~ U).8 +-oJ 0) +-oJ ~ - ;5 "(/)_ 5. c (/) ro c....... :;:; 0) c 0 'õ O)"~ CD C o (/) C C CD"§ '0, C ~'c'ëi3 E 0 0) CD CD 'ëñ ro +-oJ 0) = -a:o (1)~-g£2 ~ ~ø f!! 0 0 0) 0) >c~o ~:'=+-oJC£ co :J ~ .c -0 'C +-oJ o+-oJ -:JC:J£ 00 ~ (1) o..roO 0) ~ c 0) ==.~ t) 5 oð '6.. -g S £ CD t5 .c ~ ~ ro .!! 0 6-.~ -; "~ c C\J CD 0) e c ~ 0) ~ ns (/) ;;; o..'¡:: ~~~ ~e.~~~ "~ ,.... > _:;:: :J ~ 0 ~ ...10... :> 0) ns o.."~ "5 :.= -æ"5£>CJO)o..o.c 0) o.Q)·c.2 £ o...c :J a)ØIO<ct-roroo.. .! ¡¡: >-c ~o (1)+: 0. co o (J '- 0 D....J « (/) CD (/) (/) :J o .~ -0 c .Q (/) .~ E 0.. £ .c E O+-oJ:Jo ~ C 0..0 0..0 CD CD(/)£ CD £C+-oJ£ ~~E~ Oo..oc 3=+-oJ~ro CDC-o .- CD CD -0 > (/) > CD Q; CD._ (/) > c. CD -º o ~ 0 c '§ ~ .~ ro ~O) ~ ~ ro .§ "5> 0 2 ro ~ _:'=CCD(j) == 0.. CD £ . 3= g- E .~ e ~CDE:CCD êï5~8æ£ (5 CD . 0 ..-; ~ 0 0.. CD -0'0 CDc.. (/) 0 OCD:.= c\Ïcr5~ ~~ (1).- c.... 0.(1) co (1) J::E ... (1) co.c .c'" 3:Cã (/) CD (/) (/) :J (5 0 CD .~ "0 ..-; -0 ~ 0 C 0.. CD .Q -0 '0 (/) ~ e. ..~ o CD 0 E §-£ -§ E ~co..° 0..00)0 0)(/)£0) £c+-oJ£ ::~E~ o 0...0 c ~c~ro .~ 0) -0 -0 > (/) 0) CD ~ 0) > (/) CD ~ 'ã) 0 > 0.. t.) U o 0) æ "§ ~ .~ O)+-oJ~O) >croc '0, ~ 2 "~ :.=cCD 0..0)£ .§ g- E "~ ~CDE.c ¡g£0:J øt-OQ.. c\Ïcr5~ ~g' (1).- ~êi) co (1) J:~ ... (1) co.c .c'" 3:Cã "5C;;°CD 0.. 0 ;£ o .c~ (/) t) ro~ 0 0 CD CD CD C\J 0 -;:-Q (/) . c C\J £ 0.. > roEo 1 000 CD . CD C\J :J 0 C. -o..EL()o 0.. 0 0') CD - ci)~~-æ~5~ .~ ~ 0 (/) . CD ~ ã)0+-oJ:J(/»ro CD+-:~e~~êï5 E~~CDCEO CD ro 0 a5 . +-oJ 0) £0~CJa52§ CD ~ (/) t (/) 0.. CD o ex>'§ 0) ~ ã5 CD ã5 cñ :J .c £ £ E .c :J 0 ~ æ .~ CD (/) 0 ~+-oJ +-oJ£ c£~t.)t5 c ~ CD . ¡g .~ ~ 0 .Q o..t.)~CoCCD(/) CD ~ ro 0 @ 0) 0 .~ £o~o(/)EcE +-oJ ~CD:JEro CD o)LL (/) 0 > E 0) .~ £ ro Q; 8 ~ 0 (/):J g>~ c c cO .8 ~ 0 ': CD 2 .- CD c~.c(5.c·"E c£ roI+-oJO)->CDO 3= ~ .---.'ëi3 :> E +-oJ ~roeE·~t(/) :J .~ -0 0.. E ro CD o 0 c (/) cD .c 0..'- ~ ~ 0.- ~ :J 0) 0 ~.c~£O(/)-oO ~ U).:!! c c o (1) +: E ~ E ::] 0 00 "5(;) 0.. 0 o .c~ t) ro ~ CD CD C\J ~E5~ 0) . 0) C\J - o..EL() 0.. 0 0') ci)~ ~ -æ "~ ~ 0 (/) ã)O+-oJ:J CD+-oJ~O EE~Q; O)rooc £ +-oJO) +-oJO£CJ O)~(/)t o ex>"~ 0) ã5 (/)- :J .c .c~oo :J ~a: (/)0 +-oJ C £ ~ t.) ~ 0) . ¡g o..t.)~ct.) CD~ ro o@ £O~t.)(/) ; O)U: ~ 5 CD .~ £ ro Q; . (/) :J O)~ c ~.8-o50...0) ocro.ct5.c ~roI+-oJO)== 0) 3= ~ ~'o ro :J"~-O e.E £OOC(/)cD ~~o ._ ~.c~£O o CD ;£ (/) 0 CD O+-oJ-o o ~._ £ 0.. > t.) 0 0 :JOe. o CD ~c ~ o'~ O)~ (/) > ro :J~êï5 c E.8 0) a52§ (/) 0... 0) (/) ã5 0) ~£E c .~ 0) ro+-oJ£ £ +-oJ o (/)- 0 .º CCD(/) 0) t.).~ E c E E ~ o -0 E t.) ro 0 ccO CD'- CD .E c£ ~ 0) 0 E+-oJ +-oJt(/) E ro.~ .co.. :J 0) 0 (/) -0 0 ~ U).:!! c c o (1) +:E ~ E ::] 0 00 ui -õ C> ~ c 1:? 0 t .~ Q) ~ ~ 2 - §;:C'a §£ ~ Q) ~o C'a 0 '';::: .~ c.. C'a Õ c ~ 'õ> c.. 1:? C'a - 2 1:? -g ~ ~ ~ il: Q) o~ « .~ ~ - ~ ~ g <i:-;;= C > C'a Q)õ c.. ,1e >;: .Y;:.. "C ~ ~ Q) 0 -;;; £ > c.. 2 C'a ~ .~ ß::J ~ c.E c Eëij en C'a~~ C'a~ ~ cO)O) O:f: C'a Q) E .c 0 Q) t 'C . Q) c.. ~ Q) ~ ~ >-_ ~ .c 15 8 ID g. -æ C'a.Q. ~ £ E ë ;:= .9 ~ ~ g ~g.9 ~~~E~E~~8E o~ 2~0) ui·~ 2 C'a Q) Q) "C 0 Q) ,s ~ .9 t ¡i- .g ê g £ ~ 1:? °00 -g ,~£ æ ~ c.. ~ § ~ ~ '(3 ~ ~ 5 § :) g ~ ~ := g ~ ~ ,~~ ~ ë ~ :5 ~ ..; 0 -g .ê .c :c .Q;:.c ~ >- co ~ ~ ~ C> ~ 0 g ~ E 2 5. ~ -æ 1ij ~ 1:? ~ Q) E 0 - .~ .E -@ en 0 ~ E C'a Q) E êi5 ~ - 0 -æ E <D ~ § t5 .~ ~ 1:? c "C ~ £ 0 - ~ ~ E - 0 .~ ~ co ß ~ "C - a æ 'S õ :ê .~ ~ B 0 E ~ ~ ~ il: § ß 13 .9 ~ - g - 'ë ã) - o~ E Q) - ;: Q) 1:? () CJ) c t ~~Q)gQ)Q)u"C~Eëij"C'y- C'a, 50~ .Q ~ ~ ~ ,~ E ~ ~ ~ -g '"ê ~ ß £ ~ ~ 0 ~ ß :6 ~ g Q) ~ c 5. C'a - Q) ~ æ ~ o~ .> a ~ 0) CJ) eEL{) E c...Q Q) C> ~ E '00 U E .Y e g. ü £ o "C C Q) - ~ .c c ~ ~ Q) 0 u c.. ~ .~ o c :E £ ëij ·E- :: '~ ~ Q) ~ ~ ~ 1:? 0 c.. 1:?'~ § - Q) :~ en 0 Q) Q) "C E Q) x u - .~ - "C co ~E;:"CQ)E-.c~8o.cQ) "CQ) -Q)- Q) « >- ~ -g 0 "C U >-"C':: 0 c..~ 0) £ g-g a.. .> Q) t ~ (3 0 ê ~ E c ~ - E 0 g> C> ·c (3 1:? ~ -g ~ ~ .~ g ~ 5.== ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ :6 ~ ,~ :: c ° e - -æ 'E 0 Q) genE .,g ,~en 8 Cõ .c Q) ~ ~~~-g£æ15£ð~-g~1:?æ~~~ ~~ë a.. co C'a:5 C il: = Q) 0 C Q) ~ ~ g o.§ en ~ ::J '~ 8 .~ E "~ .~ ~ 1:? .~ .Q ~ ~_ ~ g-; ~ æ 0Q; -g ~ C Q) CJ)_ Q) 5-.~ g :: E ~ Ü ~ 0) = ::J 1:? E ~ ~ £ .,g ~ enEQ)>-c..«Q)==Q)cenC'a"C_-co~ coO) ë "C ~ ~ c.. :~;:.c 'c ::J en ~ .c .(3 ë .8 ~ ~ - Q) ~ æ c.. ~ ë;; 1:? § I- 2 ~ ,~ ,Q g> § ~ ~ ' 0 8: t KEg -g ~ ~ I- '00 ~ 0) ~ 5- -æ e 8 ~ 'CD Ui' ~ co 0 o « co - :c 0" '.~ g a:"C Q).~ £ >- c.. Ceo 0) 0) ã5 C .~ æ ::J ~ C E::J . C ~ c.. :~ ~ Q) 0 °00 £ ~ ~ ~ 1e ID en >-.,g E 0 § co ~ g- ~ ° ê £ ~ .~ C> 1:? o a.. 0 ë 1:? .c ~ 0 0.. ~ 0) Q):~ 0) g.c ~ E ,~ - .~ ~ ~.- - ~ C 0 ~ ~ ,~ T"" E C £ Q;.S;"c E 1e ,~ C .- Ü >- C .c Q) Q) Ü eeL{) 0 C'a ~ c..:> Q) 0 co "C ..:)~ ~o~E.c 0)22CJ);:.ECJ)ã)êi50g>0) ~ -g 1:? ¿ ,15'~ § I- :5 E ~.2 ,g g ~ Q) ~ g Q)~ -g ;:] C Q)"Q C> c.. ~ u en a E _ ß 1e 0 ,- a E Q) .- u (3 -g æ a. ~ ,.§ ~ Q) ~ æ - 8 ß- CJ) ~ ~ ~ ~.9:ê § C .~ g il: E 'E'~ C'a Cõ ~ g § ~ ~ 2 C -; 0) "C "C >- ~ ~ 15 Q. ui 8 E C æ ~ -g ~ :; -~ ~ ~ ~ ,~-5 8 ~ æ ~ § 0 :: § ui 8'~ ~ 8. C'a g -g ,Q 'g co,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ £ ~- .~ :~ g g 2 ~ ~ 15 .~ E ,~ ð ~ £ ;: æ :ê 8 ;: ~ ê E > ,~ ·c 'c ~ c.. Q) ß- Q) E E 0 Q) æ § en ,Q> C t5 ::J 0 ã) ~ :g 2 C ~ ~ æ ~ .c 0 E >- § > en.2 0) 0) "~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ £ g- ~ ~ :5 :5 ~ 8 0 ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ K t8 ~ g u . . ui Q) - õ ,~ 0) ~ C £ ,at ~"C.c ~ a o§ ~ ~ ~ :: C >-"~ ~ 0) æ .9 ID Q) "C -æ'~ co il: 0 co C g .Q £ C .c ¿ :: £ 0) 1:) Q) CJ) 2 g « :0 Q);: Q) ,~ 0 « Q) ß ~ ð ~ 1:? 0 c.. a) ~ ã; .~ -æ;: :; -g.E g E~ ~ C'a;'; g-§ ~ ~ ã; ; 5~ ~ Q) E .c 0 Q) t 'C ,0) Cl. ~ Q) ~ ~ >-.';:; ~D15 aIDc...YC'ao~.cE- -0 co_a Q) 0> ~ > e C'a Cl. 'ëù E ;; 0 ~ Õ - æ - C ~ .§ .9 ~ co c.. E 0 E ~ CJ) U E ' ~ "S 13 1:? uiC'a2 C'aQ)Q)-g Q)"C~.9t ~co cc- ~ 1:? '00 -g .~ £ co ~ c.. ¿ § ~ ~ '(3 ~ ~ 5 § :) g ~ ~ := ~ ~ ~ ,~~ ~ ë ~ £ ~ ..; 0 -g .~ .c :c .Q;:.c.~ >- co e ~ ~ C> ~ a g .£ E 2 5. ~ -æ 1ij ~ 1:? ~ 0) E 0 - ,~ .E -@ en 0 ê E co 0) E êi5 co - 0 -æ E <D ~ § t5 .~ ~ 1? c: "C ~ £ .E - ~ ~ E - 0 ,S ~ ~ ß ~ "C - 0 C .- _ C C> CJ) ::J ~ ~ U £ Q) a.. c co == a ~ ~ g ~ ,'~ ~ .9 ,~ 0 ~ .9 '~ ~ 1:? 8 û) g ~ 0) ~ ~ 0) g> 0) Q) ,~ "C,~ E ~ "C .Y - co --= 5 8. ~ ,Q 2 2 ~ :§ E :c ~ ~ -g ë ~ ß ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ :i5 ~ 8 Q) ID C 5. co - 0) ~ æ ~ ;: '> 0 ~ 0) CJ) eEL{) E c..,~ 0) 0> ~ E"oo U E .Y e g. (5 £ 8 -g É 1? ro ,~ £ ,§ Q; ~ ~ K >- ~ Cl. ~ 0) c: "§ ui E '~:; æ ê .E æ ~ -g E Q) ~ -5 .9 °ffi £_ ~ ~ ~« >-~ -g 01:)~ >-~g ~c..~ -g£ g-ga.. '~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ E ~ E ;; § ~ ~ g> '~ g £ a: 8 g..9 ~ ,~ c.. Cl.13 0) 0) § :: en 5 ~ 1:? '- t5 æ "C a."C ~ § ~ 1:? § ~ .§ '~ 'ã) ~ ,g ~ .S? ~ ~ - c: = 2 - ~ D - 0 "C C ,~ £ Q) 0> 0) 0) - := c a.. C'a COs Ca..= Q)O C O)c..o g,.§ CJ) ~ -g;: 8 ,~ E ,~ ,~ ~ 1:? '~ .Q ~ ~ ~ g-; ~ æ 'Q; -g ~ C 0) CJ)_ Q) 5-'~ g :: ~ ~ (5 gj, ~ ro ,s :5 ~ '~ -E £ ~ æ E ~ ~ ~ 2: «,~ ;: 1?"§ ::) (J) ê .c .(3 ë .8 ~ ~ - Q) ~ ~ c.. ~ ë;; 1:? § I- 2 ~ ,~ .Q g> § ~ ~ ' 0 8: t KEg -g ~ ~ I- ·00 ~ 0) ~ 5- -æ e 8 ~.ã) Ui' ~ co 0 .Q « co êi5 :c 0- ¿ ,~ g a: "C ~ g £ >- ß- c: C 0 1:? 0) Q) C .~ (l) ::J ~ 0 E::J ,C c.. E"~ ~ (l) 0 "00 _ ~ ~ ~ 1e Q; en >-.. E 0 § co ~ g- Q) 0 ê £ ~ ,~ 0> 1:? o a.. a ë 1:? D .§ 0 0 '';:; gj, 0) O):!::: 0) g.c ~ E ,~ - ,~ ~ ~ ,- - ~ C 0 ~.§ ,~ T"" E C £ Q; 'S;"C E 1e "~ C '- (5 >- C .c 0) Q) (5 eeL{) 0 co ~ c..:> Q) 0 co "C ..:)~ ~a~E.c 0)22CJ);:.ECJ)ã)êi50~(l) ~"CO)¿ të~EI-1:?EO).2 ,.Qc>~0)~ c>~-g :J ê ~ ,Q g> 8. ~ 8 en ~ § ~ ~ 1e :2 ~ 8. E 2 "ê ~ ü -g æ a.,~:~ ~ ~ ~ æ - u ß- (/) .§ o,s CJ) .9"~ C ~.~ gil:EE~cococog§~~2c-;0)"C"C>-~"C15 Q. CJ)- 8 E C ~ ~ -g ~.~ -~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ -5 8 ~ æ ~ § 0 :: § ui 8'~ ~ 8. ~ g> -g .Q 'g co'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ £ ~- .~ :§ g g> ,2 ~ ~ o'~ E ,~ 5 ~ £ ;: æ :ê 8 ~ ~ ê É ~ :6 '§ '§ g ~ ~ ~ 1:? E E 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ã) a: -g ~ ~ Cl. ß 1? (l) Q) 8 § ~ .~ .(ij CD ro c: ~ 'e ~ ~ § ~CJ)a:a..g-(/)I-££~OO~~c..êi5«~Cl.mcoCJ) U . . $\$ 9..¡ 9.. ~\g ~\~ It>'~ :JjCD i _OJ Disclaimer This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one, This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only, The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. If errors or discrepancies are found please contact 952-227-1107. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the user's access or use of data provided. $\$ 9..; 9.. 0: m ~!~ ? ~,~ ::J It> ~--------~ Disclaimer This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. If errors or discrepancies are found please contact 952-227-1107. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §466,03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the user's access or use of data provided. Public Hearing Notification Area (500 feet) Moon Valley Gravel Mine Restoration Interim Use Permit City of Chanhassen Planning Case No. 04-27 ...._._-------~.._----_...--..-... .....~_...-_...._....._._..._.__.- U S FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE 1 FEDERAL DR BISHOP HENRY WHIPPLE FED BLDG ST PAUL MN 55111-4056 RICHARD T HAL VER 10271 GREAT PLAINS BLVD CHASKA MN 55318-9468 JOHN & ELAINE Z MALAKOWSKY 10301 GREAT PLAINS BLVD CHASKA MN 55318-9467 DAVID R TEICH 1217 MONROE ST S SHAKOPEE MN 55379-2062 STEVEN JON & ANGELA S SMITH 240 FLYING CLOUD DR CHASKA MN 55318-9532 LE VERNE M VASSAR 285 FLYING CLOUD DR SHAKOPEE MN 55379- LOWELL & CLAUDIA CAMPBELL 415 LAKOTA LN CHASKA MN 55318-9457 ALVIN R LEBENS 460 FLYING CLOUD DR CHASKA MN 55318-9533 STATE OF MINNESOTA-DNR TAX SPEC. - BUREAU OF R E MGMT 500 LAFAYETTE RD ST PAUL MN 55155-4030 P R KELLY PROPERTIES LLC 550 FLYING CLOUD DR CHASKA MN 55318-9502 JAMES M HAUTMAN & DOROTHY D HAUTMAN 10095 GREAT PLAINS BLVD CHASKA MN 55318-9466 JAMES E & GAIL E BECKER 10291 MANDAN CIR CHASKA MN 55318-9402 PCH DEVELOPMENT LLC 10500 GREAT PLAINS BLVD CHASKA MN 55318-9470 SKI P S COOK 15526 VILLAGE WOODS DR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347-1439 TIMOTHY P & JAMI L BUSBY 2510 BRINKHAUS ST CHASKA MN 55318-1560 LOREN P & HEIDI WHEELER 3423 BRIMWOOD DR HOUSTON TX 77068-2028 TIMOTHY M & VICTORIA A WISE 425 LAKOTA LN CHASKA MN 55318-9457 MICHAEL S SPIESS 470 FLYING CLOUND DR CHASKA MN 55318-9533 DEVAL U & DATTA D MEDH 535 LAKOTA LN CHASKA MN 55318-9456 JACK BRAMBILLA 550 VALLEY PARK DR SHAKOPEE MN 55379-1811 RENEE L STRICKLAND 10251 GREAT PLAINS BLVD CHASKA MN 55318-9468 JEFFREY & KATHLEEN DYPWICK 10300 GREAT PLAINS BLVD CHASKA MN 55318-9467 HARRY E NIEMELA 10670 POPPITZ LN CHASKA MN 55318-9280 DAN & VALERIE TESTER 230 FLYING CLOUD DR CHASKA MN 55318-9532 LARRY HOPFENSPIRGER 2720 QUAKER LN N PLYMOUTH MN 55441-3285 RUSSELL & YVONNE BARTO 400 LAKOTA LN CHASKA MN 55318-9452 LONNIE FORD 450 FLYING CLOUD DR CHASKA MN 55318-9533 WALTER & MARTHA MOROZ 495 LAKOTA LN CHASKA MN 55318-9457 MARTIN K & KATHLEEN M SCHUTROP 540 LAKOTA LN CHASKA MN 55318-9453 NORMAN & KAROLINE L MONROE TRUSTEES OF TRUST 565 LAKOTA LN PO BOX 115 CHASKA MN 55318-0115 BETTY JEAN DRURY 575 FLYING CLOUD DR PO BOX 193 SHAKOPEE MN 55379-0193 VERNE L & SUSAN B SEVERSON 675 LAKOTA LN CHASKA MN 55318-9455 JOHN J & J PHILLIPS ETAL C/O JAMES & CHERYL SULERUD 730 VOGELSBERG TRL CHASKA MN 55318-9461 ALLEN R ROTHE 750 VOGELSBERG TRL CHASKA MN 55318-9461 THOMAS W & BEATRICE I ZWIERS 9390 267TH ST LAKEVILLE MN 55044-7890 JOHN M & LINDA J REVIER 9881 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8550 MICHAEL J & PATRICIA A CONROY 9921 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8552 STEPHEN M & NICOLE DRAGOS 9960 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8551 JIMMY M & MARY E ROANE 9981 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8552 KURT G & LINDA L ABRAHAMSEN 575 LAKOTA LN CHASKA MN 55318-8455 RILEY PURGATORY BLF CRK WS C/O PAUL HAIK 701 4TH AVE S SUITE 500 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55415-1810 JAMES M & CHERYL A SULERUD 730 VOGELSBERG TRL CHASKA MN 55318-9461 ERIC E AARON 8944 154TH ST W PRIOR LAKE MN 55372-2116 CATHERINE SUZANNE LARSON 9841 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8550 GARY A & PATRICIA B KOCH TRUSTEES OF TRUST 9901 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8552 DENIS C & MARY E DUKER 9940 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8551 JEFFREY R & BARBARA C MICHELL 9961 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8552 RICH SLAGLE 7411 FAWN HILL ROAD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JAMES A & BONNIE B SWANSEN 615 LAKOTA LN CHASKA MN 55318-9455 LOIS A RIESGRAF 720 VOGELSBERG TRL CHASKA MN 55318-9461 DEBRA L WENDORF 740 VOGELSBURG TRL CHASKA MN 55318-9461 JOHN B & JANE A PAUL TRUSTEES OF TRUST 9121 SABRE LN WESTMINSTER CA 92683-5521 JOHN E & ANN LONSTEIN 9861 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8550 GERALD F & NANCY G SLOCUM 9920 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8551 MICHAEL A & MOLLY B BOYLAN 9941 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8552 PAUL J TAUNTON 9980 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8551 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 17,2004 NOTE: At 6:00 p.m., the Planning Commission and staff visited the Moon Valley site in preparation for the public hearing relating to the site. Chairman Sacchet called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Uli Sacchet, Bethany Tjornhom, Dan Keefe, Craig Claybaugh and Kurt Papke MEMBERS ABSENT: Rich Slagle and Steve Lillehaug STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; and Matt Saam, Assistant City Engineer PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS: Mitch Anderson 2853 Timberview Trail, Chaska PUBLIC HEARING: INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR SLOPE RESTORATION OF THE MOON VALLEY GRA VEL MINE. THE SITE IS ZONED AGRICULTURAL (A-2) AND IS LOCATED SOUTH OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD.. NORTH OF STATE HIGHW A Y 212 AND EAST OF SORENSON ADDITION. APPLICANT: BEATRICE ZWIERS & MOON VALLEY AGGREGATES.. INC... PLANNING CASE NO. 04-27. Public Present: Name Address Mike Spiess Jim Aiken, McCain & Assoc. Cecil Martin L. M. Vassar Steve & Ange Smith Dan & Val Tester Justin Larson, Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. Dan Herbst, Pemtom Company Lonnie Ford 470 Flying Cloud Drive 434 2nd Street, Excelsior Eden Prairie Shakopee 240 Flying Cloud Drive 230 Flying Cloud Drive 150 South Broadway, Wazyata 7640 Crimson Bay 450 Flying Cloud Drive Matt Saam presented the staff report on this item. Sacchet: Matt, do you want to give us your staff report, please? Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Saam: Sure. Thank you Mr. Chairman and Planning Commissioners. First of all, let's get acquainted with where this site is located. If you will look on your monitor, the site is in the south end of Chanhassen immediately north of 212 along the eastern city limits of Chanhassen and just south of the recently approved Settlers West development. A little bit of history on this site: In past years, some 20 to 30 years ago, the site was used for, among other things, a rifle range and a ski hill. Most recently it has been used for a mining pit. In 1996, the City approved a grading plan and restoration plan for the site with the property owners the Zwiers. The plan is shown on your monitor. Basically, what the plan did is it concentrated on the east half of the site east of an existing wetland that goes through the site. The plan allowed the applicant to grade down at 2.5 to 1 slope to have somewhat of a developable area in the middle of the site approximately 8.5 acres. What I would like to highlight is the plan allowed the applicant to go in the bluff areas along the southwest corner here and the northwest corner. A little over 3 acres, I think the narrative says. It also impacted some trees. In looking at this, the applicant would now like to modify this plan to restore the site using some of the same guidelines, the 2.5 to 1 slopes and whatnot. So we now arrive with the current plan. The current plan, while it does utilize the eastern half of the site, also goes clear over to an existing creek or wetland and then also even farther west than that to the far western corner of the property that the Zwiers own. Again, staying with the previously approved plan in 1996 what that's done is proposing is to grade down at 2.5 to 1 slopes to this time vegetate the hill putting a wood-fiber blanket on it in addition to trees that staff is recommending. Some of the differences that I would like to highlight between this plan and the old plan, that the amount of bluff impact on this plan. The old plan went into this upper corner right here. This plan isn't doing that. They're limiting the amount of bluff impact that they have; however, with that they are proposing to go farther to the west here into more trees, approximately 7.3 acres. By doing that it provides the applicant with more developable area which, of course, is the ultimate goal here and the amount is plus or minus 14 acres on this eastern half. It wouldn't be developed until sewer and water got to the site in approximately 10+ years, around 2015. It's currently in the comprehensive plan to receive sewer and water. The development would come back at a later time. At this time they are only looking to grade the site and restore the site. One of the things that staff is recommending.. .if you could zoom in here Justin, just a bit. This western edge just along the creek, the applicant has a high point in here at which he quits filling and then starts dropping down again toward the creek. Staff is recommending that at about that high point we stop the grading operation. That would preserve more of the trees in this area. It would also preserve a little over half a bluff area so we would get additional trees that are preserved. We would also preserve the natural drainage of this area since it slopes down toward the creek. We want to preserve that to protect this wetland and creek area. We believe, as I said, it more closely follows the existing drainage and would eliminate the need for additional storm sewer in this area when it would be developed in the future because since its dropping off you would have to capture that water in storm sewer and route it all the way back over to this pond right here. The applicant is proposing in terms of drainage two ponds on the site which would be sized for full development of the site. We are assuming that basically the whole flat area would be multi-family housing which the land use guides it. So we would be set up in terms of ponding and drainage for future development. Erosion control is a big issue on this site. That's one of the City's goals with the site is to restore it and the applicant has done a fairly good of showing major silt fence of course on the site and then a lot of wood-fiber blanket on the steep slopes. We may have to upgrade the type of blanket 2 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 because of the very steep slopes and the amount of water that would be coming off there. Overall, the grading plan looks good from an erosion control standpoint. I would like to point out there are two, the site is right here. Erie Avenue, a private street, is kind of in the middle of the site. There are two existing lots which are highlighted on your monitor that are privately owned. The Zwiers don't own them. So to complete the grading plan that they are proposing those lots would either have to be bought or some way come into play with this grading plan. We did put in a condition that access to the lots will have to be maintained throughout this process, at least until the Zwiers or somebody else would purchase them to bring them into the development. With that, we are recommending approval with the conditions outlined in the staff report and I would be happy to take any questions. Sacchet: Thank you, Matt. Questions for staff? Do you want to start Dan? Keefe: I have a couple of questions. Can we just go back to the erosion control just for a little bit and just comment a little bit more on what you think really needs to be done because just in looking at it, its really steep. Prom what we saw there's a lot of rutting going on and you feel that wood-fiber with, and there were a lot of trees called out for on the plan. Will it be enough to kind of stabilize that? Saam: The term wood-fiber blanket is really a general type term. There are specific categories based on steepness and the amount of velocity that the water can speed up to coming down the hill so it will have to be a certain type of blanket. It will have to be stapled in so it holds on the slope. The blanket will have to come in contact with the slope at all times. Also, the areas at the bottom of the slope right around here where my finger is going, specifically in this corner here, this is kind of a swale or ditch if you can imagine coming down the slope where the water would be concentrated. That will be a big area where erosion could occur so we will have to stabilize that. I think the staff report goes into some detail on that. They also have to put in sediment basins to control the drainage on the site but I think we can work through it. Is it your typical one? No, definitely not but I think there are items that we can use in terms of blankets and different types of silt fences and bales that we can use on this site. Keefe: Is the highlighted area, the green area that you got there, is that where most of the trees would be or are we looking throughout the site? Because I think he called for, I don't remember, is it 20,000 trees? Is it mostly on the hillside or is it in the flat area? Saam: That's my understanding. It's the smaller, bare root I think they call them? I'm not a forester. They are smaller type trees. I think the applicant's done some of that work before me. They can go into some detail. It is my understanding they would all have to be hand placed in there. With that slope I think the most you could get up there is bobcats and that sort of thing so we are not talking about any big spade coming in there or anything like that. Keefe: Can you comment a little bit more about the trees that would be removed? I can't speak to the quality but it seems like the whole area hasn't been really maintained all that well for a number of years. The quality of the trees in the areas that they would be removed, it guess it would be the center area, any comments in regards to that whether they are poor quality with all 3 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 the rutting which has gone on out there. Are we looking at trees that are falling down a lot? Any comments you can make on that? Saam: Just a couple. Again, I'm not a forester; I'm not a tree expert. Just from visiting the site there are certain areas with what I would call nice trees and there are some other areas where I would say they are more of the scrub-type variety. Kate, would you have anything to add? Aanenson: Again, I think if that was a trade-off as we go out and visit the site to look at if there are areas...I think that is one of the points the applicant brought out. When you look at the one knoll, maybe its not as good there but certainly on the top one back towards the creek, the trees, while they may not be as high quality, they are preserving the existing slope and providing some habitat. I think that staff's position is for maybe looking at the one finger or knoll that sticks out, maybe that might not be as high quality. Could that maybe be removed? Maybe originally the applicant chose not to remove it but we would treat that as a minimum. . . that creek, preserve that instead. Saam: Just adding off that. That's a good point. With staff's recommendation to save what I'll call the western half going down to the creek, if we could save the existing vegetation there it would greatly minimize erosion and that type of thing, no matter the variety of the trees. Keefe: I have one last question. In regards to the 1.8 million cubic feet of material that would be removed, could you give us a sense of where that on this plan, is it throughout the entire plan or are we talking just in the flat area and does that consist of what? Are we just pushing the dirt around in there that we are going to remove that is sort of the topsoil? Are we talking digging down? Saam: There is a number of questions in there but it is my understanding that the 1.8 million number is the excess number that they would have. In other words, the number that would have to be hauled out. As far as where they are cutting, this are is being cut down. Initially, up here they are restoring the existing cliffs out there where the erosion has been happening, but then as you go down into here they are cutting at 2.5 to 1 and that's to get this plateau area for future development of the site. Sacchet: Thanks, Dan. Bethany, any questions? Tjornhom: I have a couple of questions. Looking at the map, where does the creek start? Does it just start where that little circle is? Does it just start there like all the sudden there is a creek or is it fed by something else? Saam: This up here I think you're referring to? This is the Hennepin County Regional Corridor or LRT Trail. There is drainage from Settlers West which eventually comes down there. It's a ditch-type system, I'll call it. Everything in this area eventually goes to the Minnesota River valley so its all tributary to that and that's what I would call this, the beginning of that wetland. Tjornhom: With the grading and you've mentioned when it gets to that slope by the creek, you're going to stop the grading, correct? 4 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Saam: Yes. Tjornhom: So then you won't have erosion going into the creek? Is that happening now? Is there erosion going into the creek now? Saam: No, that's not my understanding. Where the erosion is happening now is inside the site. Basically, it's been carved out. It's kind of like a bowl now with very steep slopes, 1 to 1 or more In areas. Tjornhom: So right now the creek is protected and its not really... Saam: Yes, as far as I can tell the existing creek is protected. Tjornhom: That way then, even after the grading is done and... Saam: Correct. That's what we are recommending. Tjornhom: OK. I have a question with the trucking also. That's a lot of trucks coming in and out with fill and without fill. How long do you think it will take? Saam: That was a big concern of ours when we talked to the applicant, too. As the staff report says, the applicant is proposing a five year kind of phasing plan for the project and because of the amount of excess that will have to be trucked out, frankly it will take probably that long to find homes for 1.8 million cubic yards. A rough number that we use in engineering is 10 cubic yards per truck. Maybe you'll get some more if it's bigger than that but usually you get 10 to 12 so that's quite a few trucks going out of there. Maybe that thing can go into this but they are planning to do it in phases so maybe it's a fifth of that number, 30,000 to 40,000 one year that's trucked out and so on over five years. Tjornhom: This is a crazy question but, is this a seasonal operation or will this be happening in the wintertime also? Saam: That's a good question. I would guess it's without snow but maybe that's something we should ask the applicant. I haven't asked that. Tjornhom: OK. And this is just for my information also, where all the gravel is obviously what is up against, what they will be filling up against, is there a problem putting dirt along that gravel wall? Will that settle any way or how does that work? Saam: There's always that potential but they will have to compact it and use certain construction techniques to make sure that it all doesn't slough off in a rainstorm maybe. Tjornhom: That's what I was thinking. 5 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Saam: And that's why it's key to have the erosion control in place before really the big operation starts. That's why you want to have your perimeter silt fence up and sediment-type basin so if say it would slough off it wouldn't leave their site and it would just be their problem to put back into place because what we don't want is for it to affect Minnesota river valley or neighbors. Tjornhom: Will they kind of wrap or put something on that gravel before they would start to put fill up against it or no? Saam: Wrap I don't think would be the right word. Running dozers perpendicular to the slope, certain construction techniques to make sure that it gets compacted. Tjomhom: So no material or anything to hold in place? Saam: Material? Dirt. Yes. Tjornhom: I guess that's why I'm trying to figure out. When you put the dirt and sand together they compliment each other where all of the sudden, sand is obviously more porous than dirt is and so when sand is taking in more water will that start to erode the dirt from the hill? Saam: I guess I'm not following you. What they'll do is remove the topsoil wherever there is some and fill in with the existing dirt on the site. If they find other sand that will go back in but it's predominately clay is out there among other things. I know there's been some filling of a lime particulate out there. Maybe the applicant's environmental engineer can go into that a little more too. Tjornhom: OK. That's all. Sacchet: Thanks, Bethany. Kurt? Papke: Just two questions. To follow on the fill issue; if it's going to take five years to get rid of all the fill, does the applicant complete their grading job and then make a big mountain in the middle of the plateau that has to be managed over five years and where does the fill come from during that five years or does the grading happen over five years? Saam: The five years is the applicant's proposal or schedule to complete this entire operation but what we are proposing is on an annual basis they obtain a grading permit from us and this is an interim use permit, but maybe we'll need an interim grading plan to show are they going to work in this corner now and, if they are, how is that going to be stabilized? Maybe we will need erosion control there that will come down in the future. Is that getting at what your question was? Papke: So the grading will be sequenced and so as the grading is done the fill will be removed so we won't end up with a mountain of gravel for five years? That's kind of what I was getting to. 6 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Saam: Correct. As I said earlier, maybe they'll take out 30,000 to 40,000 a year over phases. Papke: But it won't accumulate in one spot either during that period of time? Saam: Again, they have an excess so they can spread it out if they finish in the fall, reseed it, and then maybe they won't come back until the next spring. We need additional information right now from the applicant to get an idea of what the sequencing or phasing is. Papke: The only other question I had is on the reforestation, raising 10,000 seedlings out there with deer eating their dinner every night off the seedlings and so on can be a real challenge. Is there any kind of plan in place for how we maximize the survival rate of whatever goes in there? Is there a part of the plan that addresses that? Aanenson: I believe the Forester did talk to the applicant this afternoon about the tubex trees. It is the assumption that we're putting in more smaller sapling types and that they would also be in tubes and that would protect them from the deer and the rabbits and that they would be protected as we move along with a security, to make sure that they survive. Papke: Is there any kind of black dirt going in? Right now you would be planting trees and gravel in essence. Saam: No. What we require, as we do with every new development, the four to five inches of black dirt at the surface and then they vegetate on that. If they don't have it on site they'll have to haul in some black dirt eventually. Papke: OK. That's all. Sacchet: Thanks, Kurt. Craig, any questions for staff? Claybaugh: Most questions have been asked. Did the City Forester have any specific comments? I assume she's been out to the site? Aanenson: Her comments are in the staff report and again, the goal that we looked at and going back to the original plan that was approved through litigation was just, we said re-establish the slope. The City's goal is to get trees back on the slope and that's what the applicant wants to do too. Then the property does become part of the MUSA and it is available or ripe for development. Then they've got the vegetation in place. So we've recommended a variety of different saplings. We've put a lot in there, 20,000. I think they were a little shocked at that. We're looking at six to eight inches tall and that gives us a higher survival rate, the spacing requirements and issues.. .Not all of them will survive but.. . comprise between that but we think that's very doable. Claybaugh: Kurt asked the first half of the question of just getting those seedlings the best start possible. Is there a monitoring process in place? 7 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Aanenson: I think that was the first issue that we had. We did go with the applicant and looked at some of their other sites that they've done that are on very steep slopes because we wanted to increase our confidence that this was the right way to go so we did look at some other projects and believe that it can be successful. Claybaugh: This may be a question better suited for the applicant but I'll go ahead and throw it by and you can check right over what you have there. Actually, at 30,000 to 40,000 cubic yards per year they will be out there a lot longer than five years to export over a million yards. You've got the first phase coming up. I don't know if you know how many cubic yards are involved with that or what kind of a timeline is associated with that? Saam: I'm sorry. My math was off. It would have been about 300,000 to 400,000. The timeline again is five years. Claybaugh: This first phase. I'm trying to break it down a little bit so we can get a little better perspective so it... Saam: Sure. Let me try to highlight that as much as I know and the applicant can add anything he wants. As far as we know, they want to get started along this northeast corner. Claybaugh: Down at the toe for Settlers Ridge, correct? Saam: Yes, at the southern end of Settlers West to get that established and then I believe its basically moving from east to west after that. Claybaugh: Again, I'll come back to the question that Kurt asked. Are they planning on staging any of this material, of this excess on site or are they looking at exporting it as them move it to avoid handling the material twice? Saam: That I don't have a handle on. Maybe that's something that the applicant can add. Claybaugh: They already covered the topsoil element... that's really all the questions I have. Thanks, Matt. Keefe: Known environmental issues that are out there. I see that a phase I is called for. Do we know of anything significant? Saam: In the environmental assessment the phase I is related to, we know a rifle range of shooting range was at one time going on at the site so we are thinking there may be some lead- type contaminants so we just want to have an assessment done to see what that will shake out. Sacchet: Actually, I have a couple questions, too. One thing, and I don't know whether this can be answered, somewhere I picked up on a, I think it was a DNR map, that in that area we have some of the original growth left in terms of the trees which is actually very special from an environmental viewpoint. I don't think it's mentioned in the staff report but I wondered do we have any knowledge about this at this point? It was one of my concerns I brought up when we 8 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 looked at Settlers West and I think I would like to also consider that point in the context here, if indeed there is such a point. Is that not something that has come up to your attention so far? Saam: No, not to my attention and we did send it out to review agencies so maybe we haven't heard back from the DNR yet. Sacchet: OK. In terms of the math of what we are actually doing, and obviously I'm mostly interested in the math of how much trees we're cutting, personally. We're cutting 7.3 acres just on the east side of the creek, that's correct? Saam: Yes. The 7.3 is. . . Sacchet: ... what they're proposing. Saam: Yes. Currently and that's only on the east side. That's a good point. Along the west side of the creek there's another... Sacchet: ... there's another 4 acres, right? Saam: Yes. 4.2. Sacchet: Now, one thing I'm confused and you explained a little bit how you were proposing to reduce a little bit the tree impact by the slope on down on the other side to what's the creek. Staff report has two different figures. On page 3 it says 1.6 acres and page 5 it says 1.4 acres will be saved. Which one is the accurate figure, do we know? Because I was just curious do we have a clear idea of how much we are saving? It's not a huge difference. Saam: This is a blow-up, a 50-scale plan of just the eastern half of the site and what I did here was draw in red basically the line of where we are proposing the grading would stop. Sacchet: And that would be the existing 756 contour? Saam: Yes. Their last proposed contour would be this, and you can't see it, but it's the 756. So west of this line on this area, that would be preserved. I actually used an instrument, we have to calc up that area, and I came up with 1.6 acres. Jill has 1.4 so it's right around that 1.5 acres of preserve area. Sacchet: OK. Good. Has that been discussed with the applicant or is this a new... Aanenson: He's aware of... Sacchet: You make a point that then there would be trees cut for the construction at that point, if any, where the buildings go, like a custom-grading type of approach. Is that the idea? Saam: I haven't seen any development plan per se with building pads and that sort of thing unless the applicant has something to share tonight I haven't seen it to that much detail. 9 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Sacchet: We're not to that leveL.. OK, that's fine. Now, one question I have with creating those 2.5 to 1 slopes, we're actually creating new bluffs, is that accurate? Does that meet, how steep is a bluff? Saam: Yes, that's a good point and it's something, I didn't think of it in that fashion but yes, that slope is 40%, I believe, and our bluff ordinance says 300/0 with a 25-foot elevation difference. Sacchet: I was just wondering if my memory was accurate. 30-something percent. So really all these slopes are going to be considered bluffs? Aanenson: Yes. Saam: Yes, but again, we are restoring a bad situation, by that erosion we'd be vegetating that area. Sacchet: So once they are revegetated would they fall under our bluff ordinance? Saam: Look at Kate for an interpretation. Aanenson: I'm not sure if it's pertinent to the discussion in the opinion of.. . (the tape was changed at this point).. .density credits nor are they taking any density credit for that area. Sacchet: Well the concern is that bluff has special setback requirements, doesn't it? Aanenson: Yes. Sacchet: We'll cross this bridge when we get to it. Aanenson: I'm not sure it's going to impact it in that format. It doesn't have development density right on that part. The only part we did talk about is if we want to guide the berm because the ordinance doesn't address tree removal except for the fact that you replace it. But it does address the slope issue. Keefe: Would the bluff, now assuming you make bluffs, right? When they come in and presuming somebody wants to develop it then they would have to deal with the bluff setback. Is that kind of what you're? Sacchet: Well I wonder what, I mean that is something to be certainly considering because that may be an impact that... Aanenson: It's a 30-foot setback. More than likely that type of product is going to have something.. . Sacchet: It's going to have room around anyhow. Alright. We'll deal with it when we get there. For ignoramuses like myself, what's a dozer? 10 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Saam: I'm sorry, a bulldozer. Sacchet: As in bulldozer? Saam: Yes. Sacchet: It says here the slope should be tracked with a dozer at all times. Saam: Yes. Sacchet: So, a visible dozer. Just to be clear. A lot of the conditions, let's quickly go through these things, too. One, condition 6 talks about an escrow letter of credit to be required for $619,000. How is that figure calculated? Saam: It was just grabbed out of the air. I'm kidding. We got a cost estimate from the applicant's engineer as we always do. In terms of the overall grading of the site what it would take then we review that, tack on 10% and that's how we arrive at that figure. Sacchet: OK. So that's a calculated figure. Aanenson: Let me qualify that, too. I think one of the things that we are looking at if we do a phasing plan that we probably have a rolling letter of credit which we do on a lot of other big projects is when there is open landscaping, if there is so much open land we just move that to the different phases and that would be something that we'd probably look at with this project, too. If we're doing it in a five-year, where we would have just the amount in escrow needed for that portion to re-establish, if that makes some sense. Sacchet: OK. The trees we're requiring, the staff report talks about between 9,531 and 38,080 trees which is a pretty big range and in the condition you say approximately 20,000. There seems to be a big range. Are you not comfortable being more specific or what does it depend on? Aanenson: The note that I have from the Forester was that 20,000 is what she's recommending for replacement. Sacchet: OK. So the 20,000 is the figure we're going to go with? Aanenson: Correct. Sacchet: OK. Those two properties, 230 and 240 Erie A venue, at this point they are being left alone? Aanenson: Correct. 11 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Sacchet: OK. In terms of the Comprehensive Plan, and I think that's going to start wrapping up my questions, we obviously have a juggle here between a relatively bad situation with an abandoned rifle range and a mine with a lot of erosion, and on the other hand, we have a relatively sensitive natural environment around it. I assume with staff bringing this forward you believe this is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in terms of the objectives of being compatible with the revegetation and ultimately with not destroying any natural scenic or historic features of any significance? Could you speak of that just a little bit? Aanenson: Yes. Let me just kind of refrain this. When the applicant came in to do Settlers West, what we decided on that is we wanted to, as a part of that, was to get rid of some of the problems that were on the bottom, this piece that we're talking about tonight. Specifically, the shooting range, the cell tower, those were the things that were a nuisance and actually the gravel mining operation itself, and re-establish the slope that eroding terribly and actually get better vegetation on the slopes. That was the overriding goal. Ultimately, while doing the grading we're still a number of years, at least 10 years out, before municipal services are there so if we can get the slopes re-established and the vegetation growing, we think that makes sense to get the site cleaned up and re-establish that slope for Settlers West and the other Settlers side. We think that is a good thing. Saam: I'll just add one more thing. Again, let me reiterate, this applicant has the right to do that initial grading plan which went into the bluff, didn't take out as many trees but took out more of the bluff. We didn't really have a reforestation plan it is my understanding with the original 1996 plan. Jump ahead to now, we are getting a revegetation plan, not as much bluff destruction, with staff's recommendation not as much tree removal. Still quite a bit but not as much. Sacchet: So you believe it's a healthy balance? Aanenson: Correct. Saam: We do. Sacchet: My last question, I believe this was the letter actually from the applicant, it makes a point that extensive studies are underway regarding trees, topography, bluffs, utility services, wetlands and storm water. It might be more of a question for the applicant but have you seen any of those? Saam: I guess I'm not sure if he's referring to the feasibility type study. Certainly the City isn't for this area right now. Sacchet: We' lllet the applicant speak to that one. That's all the questions. Thank you very much. With that, I would like to ask the applicant if you want to come forward, if you want to add some more and share your vision with us here. Please, if you can state your name and address for the record. Herbst: Good evening. Dan Herbst of The Pemtom Company at 7640 Crimson Bay in Chanhassen. Good evening Mr. Chair, members of the Planning Board and professional staff. I 12 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 also want to introduce Justin Larson. You met him during our Settlers West. Justin's with Sathre-Bergquist. His sidekick has got his kid playing hockey tonight, Bob Payette, so he's missing. I'm also fortunate to have Jim Aiken with us, an environmental engineer with McCain & Associates, does all kinds of environmental issues throughout the state, public and private, and also Dan Cook from The Pemtom Company. The reason I'm here is that I was able to acquire the upper plateau from Mrs. Zwiers and came before and got Settlers West approved and it was very important to me, not only what happened up above, but what was going to happen down below because I had a vested interest in it. I negotiated with her a five-year option because I, like you, want to see that restored and I want to see it revegetated and, as I got into it, she asked me if I would take it a step further and said what is the City's Comprehensive Plan here and what can I expect to do with this piece in the future. I think to just fulfill the requirements of restoration and do the 1992 plan that was in your 1996 settlement I think wouldn't do justice to the site or to your Comprehensive Plan. As I indicated to you out in the field, you took a very bold approach with guiding 70 plus acres of that site for high-density housing. I think there is some real potential to do something very creative there. Although you didn't see any progress out there tonight, I feel there has been great progress. We were able to start our development up on top and as you know the erosion that has been coming off that bluff where Settlers West is, hopefully a month from now when we do that berm up on top and put in the storm sewer system, all of the erosion that's been coming off of that northeast corner will be eliminated. We got that transmission tower removed to the great pleasure of people in Chanhassen and people at Settlers Ridge on the east. We got the range shut down. We got the dumping and filling stopped and now I think, although you didn't see any of that, to me that's been great progress because I've been listening to the range and watching things erode out there and gotten many letters in your file also from the City of Eden Prairie. They paid dearly for the Richard J. Anderson Conservation Area and that's been eroding through the years and the owner, who is now deceased, was not being very cooperative with the City. I think we've got all that in place now. We've got a developer's agreement with you. We've got a developer's agreement with Eden Prairie. Now we want to move forward and I think this is the first step. I take the blame for comparing what I submitted to you to the 1996 plan and comparing the development potential of that plan to what we are proposing because I don't think, again, that does justification to the site. Tonight I think it's important that we deal with what I've submitted and talk through our phasing plan and talk to the issues you have, but then come back to you with additional studies about trees; however, there is old growth there, what kind of trees are there and then come back to you with what may potentially happen on that site. I don't know, it will probably be a few years down the road when you are going to be looking at redoing your Comprehensive Plan but we want to be very much a part of that. As ugly as that place looks, I'm really excited about it. We were all looking to the north and to the west but if you turned around and saw the beautiful views and you saw the potential there to create some plateaus for housing, it could be a very, very unique site, something that you don't have in the City. I think if we work for that vision, work for that dream, I think we could really, really have something there. I don't want to go through all the arithmetic because you have it in front of you but yes, the original plan had less bluff than we are proposing now being, had more bluff being damaged but more trees. I love trees. I spent millions and millions of dollars in my life replanting trees and, to be honest with you, I've had greater success planting and growing than I have trying to maintain trees. All of the goals I have for that site are the same as yours. I would like to maybe, should be just go through some of your questions with the trees? Let's start with the trees because I know they are all important to 13 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17,2004 all of us but you know I've been working with Jill and Kate, very sensitive people to the tree issues, and you get mixed readings every time you go to get opinions. We called one DNR individual and he said, as indicated in your site tonight, we have too many trees up there. Let's look at planting some unique prairie grasses. I said I don't think they're going to buy into that deal. Then I talked with the other lady at the DNR today and she said she would really like to see about 500 of bare-root or root stock planted per acre which would be about 10,000 trees. She has them available on a first-come, first-served basis. There are no guarantees but she has some 6:-12" material which we could buy from her. She's recommending that we do a mixture of an oak and my favorite little tree is that eastern red cedar. It's a very tough tree and we're talking about putting on a southern face slope. Although I think we kept talking about granular material out there, there really isn't much good granular material left out there. It's all been picked over for the last 75 years and what's there is very, very marginal. In fact, some of the banks you were looking at weren't granular at all. It was basically clay material. That is going to be a good basis for us to do a restoration and do the build up of those 2.5 to 1 slopes and the 40% slope there and then I think you've got some very stiff requirements for us from that and from the Carver people of how we're going to re-seed that and protect. I took staff out to Settlers Ridge and showed them similar banks along the Flying Cloud Airport. We did some 2.5 slopes out there. We put fiber blanket in and we put bare root in there and it's doing quite well. I'm very proud of it. We took the extra step. We didn't just plant it in the ground. We put the base material on it. We put the tubes on it. We put the stakes. You also need a lot of luck when you've got that kind of drainage sloping. You need moisture at the right time of the year but I think we can do a good job. Also, we had some very severe sloping at Settlers Ridge, the project to the east. A very severe ravine, much more severe than we're dealing with here and I've taken most of your staff out there. Those have no trees on them but the vegetation from the fiber blanket and the natural material that's coming back in from whatever it is, weeds, or whatever is doing a wonderful job and is very, very, very attractive so it's done quite well. Anyway, when I read the staff report I had the same issue. What's gong on here? 9,500 to 40,000 roughly in trees. I think, in my mind the DNR submittal would be very good, 10,000 trees, but if Jill's insisting on going for the 20,000 and we can make a good buy on those next spring and we could do it in phases, again I want to do a great job there on those trees. The trees will be important once we get it all established but we've got to get those hills established first, we've got to get the fiber blanket set, we've got to get the grass to grow before we start marching up there with people and disturbing that and start to plant trees because we can't a machine or a bobcat up there. On the grading issue, we have no intentions that I'm aware of mining that site and stockpiling in the middle. As you know, that dirt business, to move it twice is a costly deal. I think we've like to do it in the five phases we talked about and for my own self-interests I want to get Settlers Ridge and Settlers West taken care of, this phase of this neighborhood. This is pretty much established already although it exceeds, it's a little steeper than 40% but we build there second and protect the parkland there and then move our way through five years hopefully if we can find a home for that material and do this in stages. I think it's easy to look at this site and say gee, I don't want to lose all those trees and I want to do that. I may want to limit the development area and hopefully when you come in with a plan you'll open it up and take another look at it. I think there is some danger to shrinking what we have here. Ordinances get stricter and all of us get tougher on our requirements of how we develop things but I do think I was anemic here in what I submitted to you. I think I really should have submitted to you a visionary type plan where we could fulfill your Comprehensive Plan and put a, this proposal only has 18 usable acres and we'd 14 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 have a hard-press knowing what I know in the marketplace today to probably even get 200 housing units up there. That really isn't a real creative plan in my mind. We can't get a good mixed use. It's going to be also tough with 200-300 housing units to bring that pipe from 101 all the way down to this site and justify that so I think we want you to work with us and come up with a visionary type plan. I would like to expand in the future with you, in discussions with you, the development area. If we are able to get a good plateau up there, maybe 25 acres of land to use instead of the 18 we could come up with a good mixed use. Some of the land that's not shown on the plans to the west is guided Office/Industrial. I think you can vision neighborhood commercial and office. Some of the things you saw in a grand scale at Edinborough, on a smaller scale here. That type of product is going to be great for the City. It's going to fulfill some of your housing needs that we're going to have to convince you of that. It's going to give you additional park fees. It's going to give you additional revenue stream. Most of these townhouse projects, I talked with Gordon Hughes today, the City Manager of Edina, again he'd like to bring her back there and tell you what they did but, very little of what's out there is maintained by the City of Eden Prairie except those bridges going over the streets. All of the interior streets serving all of those condominiums and townhouses, the senior high rise, the offices, the retail and the theatre, are all privately maintained so the revenue stream coming into the city is phenomenal because you don't have the revenue going out. I think we can show you the numbers on that eventually if we can get the densities and the land mass to create a great plan for you. Any other questions? Sacchet: Questions for the applicant? Keefe: Are you OK in establishing the ponding now or later on? Herbst: No, I think the ponding has to come in real early. We didn't take you around, we didn't have time for that but there is some slurry areas out there now that have been holding runoff but I think we want to fix those up. Keefe: OK. If I'm looking at pond one, access to the two existing homes, it isn't clear to me exactly how, I think they stay and you... their access would be through the first pond. That's how it appears on the plan and I'm curious to... Herbst: That's probably at least five years out. The grading, as I see would occur here, this pond will take care of all their farms through here. This would be obviously before we could go into here. We've got to work out a hardship situation with the two homeowners and then we've got to come in with a specific use plan for that because, this is showing the ultimate use with a driveway going up to the site and more ponding coming here before it gets to the creek. That pond is just there to pick up the drainage so it wouldn't get to the creek. Keefe: It is a part of what we are approving? Herbst: Correct. Keefe: It needs to be worked out in terms of where the exact location of the pond would be? 15 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Herbst: It cannot be accomplished until we, there's easements, that the two homeowners that live there have a legal interest in so we have to treat those homeowners fairly. We have to work out that easement deal. Sacchet: Has there been any discussion with those homeowners? Herbst: Dan Cook has talked to I think both of them and I'm not in the position since I'm on the option end of things to be purchasing the property but I think as we move there Mrs. Zwiers and myself have got to work something out with those homeowners. Sacchet: So that's still to come basically? Herbst: Yes. Sacchet: Sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt. Any other questions? Claybaugh: With respect to your phase I, could you give us a little bit of a overview in terms of timeline in what you see going out for export, just to put that in perspective? Herbst: I would, I'm just guessing, and maybe I'll let Justin answer that but I want that done this fall because I've got housing up on top and it's not a real large site. It's pretty steep but I would like to come in and get the permit for that and bond for that and have that accomplished this year because of what's going on up above. Quantities and material, do you know what's in that first phase? Justin Larson: In the first phase we haven't really...but I think it would be probably minimal, to tell you the truth just because of the way the slope is... Herbst: Probably under 100,000 yards I'm guessing. Sacchet: So what you're saying is the first phase you pretty much balance the material? Larson: That's right. I don't think until we start going west that I don't think the earthwork will be extensive as far as having to export. Claybaugh: In terms of your months of operation from year to year over the five years, what do you anticipate? Herbst: Well, I think it depends on how granular it is. To me, it doesn't look real granular. Unless it's granular, it's hard to work with during the frost season but that phase I that you're asking about is very important for me to get done this year if at all possible. Claybaugh: I'm just trying to get into the quantities that you would be exporting and the effect that mayor may not have on... 16 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Herbst: I would doubt if there's any export there in that first or second phase. There's enough up and down material out there that we got to get balance out and get this pond taken care of before we're going to start looking at going down the road. Claybaugh: Have you exported this kind of quantity on any other projects that you've done? Herbst: I have not. We're grading over a couple billion yards out at the airport right now but it's balancing. Last year I think I told you I had a 100,000 on that first site at Hennepin Village and even though it was granular, it's difficult. Sometimes having excess material is a blessing but mostly I found it to be a curse. Claybaugh: That actually just generates a little bit more concern that there's only 100,000 going out in phase I. That puts the bulk of the material on the other phases. Have you considered what kind of impact any whole schedule would have on how you would tackle that? Herbst: I'm going to leave that to probably the grading contractors. I think we can work with Matt on that. He's probably more experienced with large quantities like this before. Claybaugh: Nicely deferred. Herbst: I have not experienced that so I want to be honest with you. Papke: I'm not sure if this is a staff or an applicant question but one of the things we haven't touched on yet is how much of this is visible from the LRT trail? There's some of the most spectacular vistas in Chanhassen are on that trail and I'm sure, I know there's like a park bench up on the trail there where you can look down into Shakopee and I'm having difficulty visualizing where some of those site points are in relationship to this because I would hate to see us end up with what is now a beautiful, the most beautiful view in Chanhassen looking down on something that isn't attractive. Herbst: If your talking about up above, I guess you've got to pick a point, but the trail itself you can see it right here, more than 100 feet down below this right now. The trail is very recessed... Papke: But there are a couple of spots where it peeks out there and I'm not sure exactly where. Herbst: When you start up at the trail when I've jogged it or walked it, you can look down, you're kind of looking more very southwesterly down that chute to Shakopee and I don't think anything here is going to be impacting that. Papke: That was my major question. So none of this is visible from the trail? Aanenson: Ultimately, when it's developed you may see something but the goal was to revegetate it so you kind of catch up with that but as far as knocking down the bluff, that was one of the reasons why we pulled back the one slope on the other side of the creek. When your even on Erie, you can't see your crossing, you still wouldn't be able to see. And that's the topographic break that we're trying to maintain. 17 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Papke: OK. Herbst: As you know it's pretty severely cut. Every time I go down there I say how in the world could they do this with horses? It was a major, major cut so it's very recessed. Sacchet: I asked you this question when we looked at the site earlier tonight and I would like you to address this for the whole meeting for the record also. Why do we have 1.8 million cubic yards of material that have to leave the site? Why can't it be balanced more on site? Herbst: I think that was the first question I had. The engineer said it's just truly impossible. If you were to put this material back in, all you would have was, the bluff probably came way, way out at one point in time and dropped way down. If you were to try and balance the material and leave that 1.8 on the site there would be at some point in time you're just going to push that bluff further and further out towards 212 and you're not going to have any land left to use. As you know, your standards, we're even showing I think a 4% rise stepping up this thing and we're still taking out that many. If we were to make it a little more level there would be a lot more material coming out of there. It's very close to what was approved in your original plan to restore that site. Sacchet: Do you remember how much would have to come out with the original plan? Herbst: 1.8, believe it or not it's pretty close. Sacchet: So it's pretty much the same amount. That actually stayed the same even though you are doing a larger space? Herbst: Yes. Sacchet: That's a very good reference point. Herbst: Prom what I talked to you about tonight is pushing the envelope a little more. Sacchet: Right, right. What's your, do you have a sentiment about the proposal staff made that the grading towards the creek on the east side of the creek that you would stop at, what was the elevation, 756 and kind of leave the other side untouched for now? Do you think that's a good idea? Is that creating a problem? Herbst: I think that it's a catch 22. I think it makes sense because Bob Generous and Kate make a statement in there that we could still use that area but it's a product that makes it more complicated by going up vertically. Even at Edinborough and Centennial Lakes the only vertical product I had was that senior rise, that building there. That's a very tough market. People are comfortable with three floors, sometimes four, but after that it gets to be a real market grind. In fact, some of that product, the first phase of Edinborough was basically designed with some walkout to that four-story to kind of discourage the elderly from buying them because they wanted to cater to young people to keep them there. That's what Edina was lacking was housing 18 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17,2004 for people that want to work there and I think you start pushing that product up and you lose that market appeal. Sacchet: So what I hear you say is you're OK with this for now since it's going to be calculated into the buildable area? Herbst: I don't want to see it shrink because it could come back to bite us. Sacchet: I wouldn't really shrink your buildable area. Herbst: Yes, it does. It shrinks the amount of land that would be open for buildable area... Sacchet: It does shrink. Yes, that's right. It shrinks it by 1.4 or 1.6 or something like that. Herbst: When you get old you hate shrinkage. Sacchet: So that's contrary to your aim. I understand. Are you OK with the conditions basically? The escrow amount? Herbst: The issue I've worked out with Matt, letters of credit. Most cities allow us to do development bonds and there are not as expensive but a letter of credit is very costly so I've talked with Matt. A $620,000 letter of credit up front would make Mrs. Zwiers probably have to put in escrow at a bank $620,000 cash or, if its stocks and bonds, probably $800,000-$900,000 before banks can issue that letter. If we can do this in sequence of maybe a fifth of this or enough to cover each phase 110%... Sacchet: So you would like to do it in phases, sequencing it? Herbst: Yes, and the same with the trees. If we could do the trees, and if Jill could talk to the same people that I did today, too, and if we can make that kind of buy, that's a great buy for trees. ... in the future, that could get very costly if we were to have to put 38,000 trees out there. At the price of what I paid last year that could be a 1.9 million dollar deal. .. . Hennepin Village. Sacchet: The last question Dan, .. .(the tape was changed at this point).. .stormwater. Can you give us a little bit more meat to that one? Herbst: I think most of its done except a tree survey but we have got a good stormwater plan worked out, we've got good contours for you, we've got a good storm pond system set up and I think the data that's on the site now is, we're light years ahead of where we were six months ago. Some other things we've got to do as we work on this plan with you is we've got to work out some access issues with MnDOT and that's another thing we haven't addressed. Sacchet: Alright. I think that's all the questions we have for you. Thank you very much for your presentation. This is a public hearing so I would like to invite anybody who wants to address this item, wants to add your view to it, any comments, please come forward. Any takers? Please state your name and address for the record please. 19 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Spiess: My name is Mike Spiess at 470 Flying Cloud Drive. Per the map I'm actually a little bit west of what they're proposing so a lot of my questions did get addressed; however, some of the things I'm hoping the applicant would be willing to do is keep us in mind when they are moving into the western part of that because it's going to, there's a lot of dust and stuff that will be kicked up. Ideally, there are things we can do as homeowners to limit the effects to our houses. I know I've talked to my other neighbors. We don't see this as a problem. We'd like to work with them however we can, asking that they keep us in mind, too because we are existing. We aren't part of what we currently see here but we are. One of the other questions I had is on the, I know they own a little bit more land than what is currently being proposed here. It's probably only another couple of acres possibly which would be directly in front of the three houses that aren't listed here. I'm just wondering if there is anything in place for that currently. If that's going to be part of this or not. There was something else but for the life of me I can't remember what it is right now. Sacchet: Kate, do you want to just address his concern, his question? Aanenson: Again, there are conditions for grading and we do have that in here. I was just checking with Matt on that too regarding hours of operation and there are standards as part of the interim use permit and that's why there are securities so those are enforced. As far as again, the overall grading, ultimately it is the City's goal as we update the City's Comprehensive Plan which has to be done in 2008, we did provide a phasing plan and we anticipate that this area will be coming in approximately 2015. But again, we kind of go back and re-examine that. We guided the rest of this area for industrial. There are some industrial uses along 212 and we want to make sure that there is adequate access based on our understanding that if 212 gets built, this would become a county road and we want to provide access. The county doesn't want every individual driveway so ultimately, everybody has benefited, not the exclusivity of one person. We would work through those issues as we're updating the Comprehensive Plan. We want to do a corridor study and look at how all these properties connected and link to each other as we provide municipal services which would be sewer and water and road access so that discussion will be coming up again. This plan doesn't propose any development now. We're just trying to fix some other issues. Spiess: OK. And that was my other question is this is strictly grading? This is nothing else at this point? Aanenson: That's correct. Any plan that would come forward requires a public hearing before the Planning Commission. Spiess: OK. That's all I had. Thank you very much. Sacchet: Anybody else who wants to address this item please come forward. State your name and address for the record please and let us hear what you have to say. Tester: I'm Dan Tester and I live at 230 Flying Cloud Drive. I'm one of these houses, this one right here, this is where I'm at. I've been in there almost 27 years and I realize that progress 20 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 coming all over and I don't know, I guess I'm concerned as where my family is going to be with all this and what the plans are with my property and what's going to go on with that and also, with all the construction and stuff, I'm concerned with the quality of our living there. Our quality of our life while this is all going on too. Also, this pond here looks like its right in my driveway and I don't know how I'm going to get in and out of there. Anyways, I don't, it's been a quiet, nice neighborhood all these years or most of the years, not the last few, but I kind of hate to...I wish it wasn't all happening. I would like to just live out the rest of my life there, get the place paid off and stay. I don't know. So anyways, I'mjust concerned as to what's going to happen to my place, where we fit in. So anyways, I don't know what else to say. It's happening and it's kind of different experiences for us. Sacchet: Well, can we respond to that? Saam: I'll just suggest a couple of things and then Kate can add anything she wants. Two of our conditions were specifically meant for the two residences, the 230 and 240 residences. Access to their houses has to be provided at all times and we're talking about doing this in a phasing approach and what staff would envision is phasing plans that would show each phased approach and when he gets to the west side, if the Zwiers or Mr. Herbst doesn't have control of those properties, then those properties would have to be left out. The driveways will have to be shown how they're going to access off the proposed street or whatever so we won't forget about these residences. Sacchet: Kate, do you want to add anything? Aanenson: Part of the reason why we felt strongly about on the other side of the creek, that gives them a level of protection. The one-and-a-half acres that we talked about as we drove down that street, you can see that there is kind of a natural, topographic break, the creek and then the bluff rising up. Again, as Matt indicated, and everything behind this, if this property was not to be blended, the people on Erie, because ultimately this could be happening as one. If that doesn't happen, then we would make sure that the break was such that there's not such a severe, and obviously the stormwater pond couldn't go there. That would be phase one so I think one of the conditions that we, what we probably should put in here is that we evaluate each year kind of see where we're at as those phasing plans come forward and see if we are on task. And that would give them an opportunity, the homeowners, to see where they are and it sounds like there are some negotiations going on and we certainly would be happy to.. .make sure they understand. Sacchet: OK. And I would expect that the creek area is something that we would try to preserve from every angle from the developer as well as from the City's side. Aanenson: Absolutely. Sacchet: It is not inconceivable that those properties could stay if it turns out that way. On the other hand, I'm sure there will be discussions and options explored as this moves forward. We are really not in a position to really answer your question, what's going to happen? Ultimately, you decide that because you're the property owner for that particular piece. I would expect that over time different options will become more clear as the phases come further that direction of 21 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 the grading. In the meantime, you don't have the shooting next door anymore or the hauling and mining. You may have some grading. I'm not going to judge which one is better but I probably personally would know which one I prefer. The hearing is still open if anybody else wants to come forward and address this item, please do so. State your name and address for the record please. Ford: My name is Lonnie Ford. I live at 450 Flying Cloud Drive. I've only lived there for maybe three years now. My one concern is your flooding. When I moved in the river had flooded over and took out 212. You couldn't get at it. I can figure that it's still going to do that seeing how in 1965 it was way up here. Among all the wildlife issues that they've had listed for that area in the first place. This whole area that you're talking about was all deemed a wildlife refuge area. Is that null and void now? Aanenson: That area is not a wildlife.. .everything south of 212 is part of the wildlife refuge. It's on the south side of 212 and it's not the City's intention to provide any municipal services south of 212 because most of that is in the flood plain and this area here that would be developed, it would be above the bluff. Ford: It's clearly above. Are you having access only from 212 to these houses? Aanenson: That would be correct. Ford: And when 212 floods again, what are you going to do? Aanenson: It's the same situation that would happen... Ford: We don't have a problem getting to our homes. It's a little past that towards Lion's Tap I would say that it does flood out across 212, but that was only three years ago and the water level didn't get that high. I don't know if they called 1965 a 100-year flood or not. I would consider that if it was going to flood again and a lot more than it did before, you are going to have some trouble. Aanenson: Sure. Again, right now the goal is to get the slope re-established and we're not looking at a development proposal but that's something, certainly as it moves forward, that we look at access points on that property. Ford: You're not drawing in a new road off of 4? Aanenson: Right now we're just using an access to get in there to mine and extract the material for this development proposal. Ford: That's my only questions. Sacchet: Thank you. It's a very good point that needs to be looked at. Anybody else want to address this item? If not, I'll close the public hearing. I thank you very much for all your 22 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 comments and aspects of very good points you brought up. I appreciate it. Now I'll bring it back to the Commission for discussion and comments. Claybaugh: Well, certainly going out on site and reviewing the site personally, it's in dire straits of help, sooner being better. I think it's a responsible, measurable response and I'm very supporti ve. Sacchet: Thanks, Craig. Bethany, likewise? Tjomhom: Likewise. Except that I do want to add that I hope that as the City and developers work together they do whatever the neighbors and the homeowners during this whole process. Sacchet: Dan, anything to add? Keefe: I support the proposal. I just had a couple of questions. One is in regards to any DNR report. Would we add something like that as a condition to this in terms of any... ? Aanenson: There is a 60-day comment period. Anything that they would submit to us between now and when it goes to City Council we would certainly add that. Keefe: OK. In regards to the, I think number 30, which is the tree, the range...I guess what we would be approving is that they are going to plant trees. Is there any more specificity around that? Sacchet: Well the condition asked for 20,000 trees. ...for 7 by 7 spacing. It's relatively specific. Aanenson: I think the clarity that the City Forester provided to the applicant was the size and species type and I think there is concurrence on that and what we were looking at is 6 to 8 inches. These are actually seedlings and that may be again put with tubes so they're protected. So I think there is concurrence on that and we gave them a price on that and I think it's significantly less than what they thought originally. Again, that breaks down based on what we can get at bulk from the DNR and they want us, this is a site that they've identified that they want to look at that... Keefe: There's a fair amount of discussion around phasing. Does that mean we would require in regards to paving or review or... Aanenson: I think you should add a condition. Saam: I do believe we tried to address that. Condition number 3. I'll just read it. It says, "The interim use permit shall be approved for a period of five (5) years from the date of City Council approval. Annually, the grading permit must be renewed. The applicant will need to request a formal extension 60 days prior to the expiration date of the permit." So what we were looking for, kind of proposing was that the entire plan would be approved by yourselves and Council and then staff would annually review a grading permit for the site unless you wanted to get into more detail. 23 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Sacchet: Does that address your phasing concern? Because I was wondering about that too, personally. Keefe: I think so. Claybaugh: I have a.. .question. Sacchet: Go ahead, Craig. Claybaugh: What would you see being in terms of supporting documents for that application? Saam: Sure. It would be a phased grading plan, and interim grading plan for the area they're proposing to grade and work on say, next year, they would have to supply that plan. We would have to review it based on this plan and make sure it conforms. Claybaugh: At which point you could review how it would affect neighbors, haul routes, and so on and so forth. Aanenson: Exactly. Quantities to be moved, landscaping. I think if that's something that you wanted to put on a administrative or if you want to just see that for your edification we could include that in the packet so you could see what we've issued. Claybaugh: It sounds like number 3 would be satisfactory. Sacchet: Sounds good. Anything else, Dan? Keefe: No. Sacchet: There are a couple of things and I think we all touched on them to some extent. One aspect is the tree aspect which we can't really tack to this one. That's something that we'd have to look at more in detail when more granularity for the project comes about and the concern if the DNR has anything to say. To me personally I think it's important to establish how special the tree gulf is and where it is. Is it all being touched by this project? I think that's something that should be established before it goes to Council. The phasing, ideally I would like to know a little more about it. We all know we have to start somewhere and I think you have a clear vision in terms of the direction we're going in with and we feel comfortable with that. As a matter of fact, I think it's an excellent direction you're taking. The concern from the neighbor about the flooding I think is quite significant, even though it's clearly above the flooding plain where this grading and all would take place. But in terms of the access, if the flooding indeed could make that place landlocked. I think that's something that needs to be looked at in terms of how we deal with that. The neighbors' concern, those two properties, I would think that's something to work out over time. I don't know if from a City viewpoint we can get more involved with it except that we put some protection in there in terms of access and we saw we all have a common interest in preserving the natural area, especially around the creek there. I think that's how far we can go with that from a City viewpoint. In terms of the contamination, lead contamination 24 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 from the rifle range, I assume that's being covered by state regulations. That's not something we have to get involved as a City, is it? Aanenson: In the Phase I environmental audit of how their going to manage that. That was the other condition that... Sacchet: There is a condition for that in there? Which one is that? Saam: Condition number 5. Phase I environmental audit. That will shake out any contaminants. . . Sacchet: OK. That takes care of that. So the one that maybe I would like to add is the concern about establishing the tree line original growth there that needs to be looked at and I don't know whether we need to say something about the flooding of access but I think that would probably be worthwhile. I wanted to mention as something that needs to be studied. I don't think we would make it a condition but it's something that just to anchor it in that it's being looked at? Saam: Mr. Chair? Sacchet: Yes? Saam: I'm just writing down my notes. Staff, we'll take a look at 212 and those elevations. My guess or hunch is that if one and either the east side of 212 or the west side is flooded the other one was able to be passed because there are other residences around 212, not just on the south side but on the north and I guess I haven't heard of them being landlocked during, I think we flooded three years ago in 2001 so that's something... Sacchet: I think the comment of the resident was flooded further east if I understood correctly what you said so it was open to the west I presume based on what I heard you say. Ford: Yes. Sacchet: OK. Alright, so that helps. I think that's all the comments I have. I really support this. I think it's in very good hands. Very convincing presentation from the applicant's side. I want to thank you for that. With that, I'm willing to take a motion. Papke: I'll go ahead. The Planning Commission recommends approval of Interim Use Permit Planning Case #04-27 to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration as proposed on the plans prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc., dated 7/16/04, subject to the following conditions as presented by staff 1 through 32. Sacchet: Actually, it's 3 through 32. Aanenson: Yes. Papke: Pardon me. It's 3 through 32. 25 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 Sacchet: We have a motion. Is there a second? Keefe: Second. Sacchet: We have a second. Any friendly amendments? Papke: Friendly amendment. Sacchet: Go ahead, Kurt. Papke: Friendly amendment that we strike condition number 29 because it's redundant with condition number 16. Sacchet: That's acceptable. Alright. Any other friendly amendments? Do we want to have a friendly amendment that access concerns in view of flooding will be further studied? Papke: That's acceptable. Sacchet: And another friendly amendment that, how do we say that, further special concern will be given in case there is original growth established on the site. Papke: Kate, with that 60-day review is that necessary? Aanenson: I guess the concern is that the DNR has additional comments that you may want to inject or did you want the Council to review those? Sacchet: Yes. That's kind of where I'm going with this. Aanenson: OK. So if the DNR does comment on any natural gulf areas you want those to be incorporated? Sacchet: Basically my intent is that question is cleared up before it goes to Council. That's really what I'm shooting for with this. Papke: If you find that necessary, it's acceptable. Sacchet: OK. So we have a motion, we have a second, we have some friendly amendments. Everybody in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries 5 to O. Papke moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Interim Use Permit Planning Case #04-27 to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration as proposed on the plans prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc., dated 7/16/04, subject to the following conditions: 26 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17,2004 NOTE: The conditions in the staff report were incorrectly numbered 3-32 (original condition number shown below in parenthesis) but have been renumbered as 1-30. 1. (3.) The interim use permit shall be approved for a period of five (5) years from the date of City Council approval. Annually, the grading permit must be renewed. The applicant will need to request a formal extension 60 days prior to the expiration date of the permit. 2. (4.) The existing buildings and outbuildings and any septic system or wells on site shall be abandoned in accordance with City and/or State codes. 3. (5.) The applicant shall perform a Phase I Environmental Audit of the property to determine if the gun range or other site operations have environmentally impacted the property. 4. (6.) The applicant must provide the City with a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of $619,650.00 to guarantee erosion control measures and site restoration and compliance with the interim use permit. 5. (7.) Permits from the appropriate regulatory agency must be obtained; including but not limited to the MPCA and MnDOT. 6. (8.) Details for the proposed pond outlets shall be submitted for review by the City. 7. (9.) On-site ponding shall be adjusted, if necessary, at the time of site development to meet the City's requirements for proposed build-out conditions. 8. (10.) If erosion control measures installed in conjunction with this interim use permit are deemed by the City to be ineffective, the City shall inform the applicant in writing of any deficiencies. The applicant shall work with the city to remedy the deficiencies in a timely manner. 9. (11.) Stabilization of the toe (first 150 feet of the slope) shall be completed immediately upon final grade. Stabilization shall be done in phases. Large portions of the site shall not be left exposed over weekends or during forecasted heavy rains. 10. (12.)The slopes shall be tracked with a dozer at all times. The dozer shall be run perpendicular to the slope to track the slope. 11. (13.) The northeast "corner" of the slope (north of soil boring 18, south of soil boring 14 and in-between soil borings 10 and 15) shall be stabilized so as to promote long term stability. This may include a terrace, turf reinforcement mat and slope drain. 12. (14.) All blankets installed on site shall be properly applied. The blankets shall make 100% contact with the soil, stapled according to manufacturer's specifications, and head trenched. 13. (15.) Geotextile and riprap or geogrids or other approved stabilization shall be used to provide toe protection. 27 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 2004 14. (16.) The seed mix specified (MN DOT 500) shall be changed to MN DOT Native mix 340 (Sandy Mid Height, dry conditions -i.e. south facing slope). An application rate of 16 pounds per acre is recommended (20 pounds per acre for hydroseeding or broadcasting). 15. (17.) Silt fence shall be installed at least 25 feet away from the toe of the slope to provide storage and allow the silt fence to function properly. As stated on the plan, the temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to grading activities. Berms may be needed to divert runoff into the basins along TH 212. 16. (18.) The applicant must provide a proposed haul route for review and approval. 17. (19.) If the excess material is hauled to another site in Chanhassen, a separate grading permit will be required for the other property. 18. (20.) All disturbed areas as a result of construction are required to be reseeded and mulched within two weeks of site grading. 19. (21.) The applicant must pay the City an administration fee of $7,124.00 prior to the City signing the permit. 20. (22.) Add the benchmark to the plan that was used for the site survey. 21. (23.) End the grading on the eastern side of the creek at the proposed high-point elevation in the usable area of 756. 22. (24.) In the future, when a development proposal is submitted, drainage and utility easements over the ponds and creek will be required. 23. (25.) Add Type 1 silt fence in the southeast comer of the site around the grading limits and around the proposed pond outlet 24. (26.) Permitted hours of operation will be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday with no work permitted on Sunday or legal holidays. 25. (27.) Appropriate signage for hauling along TH 212 is required. 26. (28.) Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the edge of grading limits. 27. (29.) MNDOT Native Mix 340 be used for the seeding. 28. (30.) All restored slopes shall be planted with trees. The trees shall be bare-root, native species, one-half to one-inch in diameter, five to ten foot spacing in a random pattern from the top to the toe of the slope. The approximate number of trees needed is 20,000 (7' x 7' spacing). 28 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17,2004 Spacing (feet) 5x5 6x6 7x7 8x8 10 x 10 Trees per acre 1,742 1,210 889 681 436 29. (31.) A driveway access to 230 & 240 Erie Avenue must be maintained at all times during construction. 30. (32.) Submit a plan showing a permanent driveway access alignment for 230 & 240 Erie A venue. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to O. Sacchet: In summary for Council, I want to point out that we're very impressed with the applicant's vision and direction that he's taking with this. We believe this is in good hands. We went to look at the site and certainly appreciate the effort to start cleaning this up in a sensible good manner that is not just cleaning up but actually leading to what ultimately can become a very positive development for the future, a little ways out in the future. That's one of the aspects I personally have been most impressed with. To actually see how far this is thought through and then in how far the situation really reaches to become a really solid foundation for a good development at some point, not that far in the future but still decent ahead and that is also part of the value that we see that the natural environment can somewhat stabilize before that is going to take place with the significant slopes that have to be dealt with there. A very difficult challenging situation with extreme slopes, with extreme erosion, with contamination of lead, a lot of significant hurdles to overcome. We have some concerns about the impact on the natural environment but I think the applicant is very sensitive in terms of how this is being approached. The concern of the neighbors that live there in the middle, there are two properties in the middle, that's definitely something that needs to be considered, at this point kind of an exception. Whether it remains and exception or not, that's going to be up to those residents to decide. Certainly, the preservation of the creek area seems to be a common thing that everybody seems to agree that's important to maintain and we are comfortable with the aspect of phasing this in starting on the northeastern comer and then coming from the eastern side further towards the west. There is concern with exporting this huge amount, tremendously big amount of material in terms of if that's going to be affecting the traffic situation or if it's going to access 212 even with the consideration that 212 will off-loaded once the highway, the actual 212 highway is going to be built. That will certainly help. But even with that, it's an issue that needs to be looked at. A lot of these aspects will be addressed after we move forward and then see more what exactly is going to come about and we look forward to further discussion with the applicant on where this is going. Anybody want to add something to the summary? Claybaugh: I do. I would direct it to Kate. I don't know if it would be appropriate, but is there anything from the City's standpoint we can do to facilitate just in terms of the two neighbors 29 Planning Commission Meeting - August 17,2004 specifically that they are duly communicated to rather... it's troubling to see someone come up and appear that blindsided. Sacchet: Yes. I think that's important that we anchor that in. I would expect that certainly the applicant will work with those neighbors as the whole region clearer. Claybaugh: I recognize that the applicant has an option and it's inappropriate perhaps for him to be communicating but there certainly needs to be something facilitated for those neighbors. Sacchet: Good comment, Craig. I appreciate that. Anybody else want to add any of the highlights to the summary for Council? No? OK. With that, I thank you very much. Good luck with your project. You want to add something? Herbst: Thank you very much for coming to the site and for the.. . deliberations. Are you open to some of the items we looked at... Sacchet: Yes. What I would encourage you is maybe set up with staff a discussion. We do that with developers at times. We have discussions where we can talk about... Herbst: But not get into it here. Sacchet: No. I would definitely not consider that issue. As a matter of fact, I'm personally not interested in... Thank you very much. Anybody want to note the minutes? APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Tjornhom noted the verbatim and summary minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated August 3, 2004 as presented. Sacchet: Minutes have been noted. Meeting has been adjourned. Thank you very much. Chairman Sacchet adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 8:30 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Kim Meuwissen 30 Lower Millllesota River Waters/ted District RecEIVED S E P 0 c., ," . ~ ( /0 U"~ CITY OF ' CHANr~4(\\ - " I, .0~EfV ... -~ - ti'r ~ ~~. ,..---s- 5- Edward A. Schlalnpp, President } Icnncpin County Ron Kraclner, V ice President Dakota County Lawrcnce Salnstad Treasurer Scott County Lco Forncr, Secretary Carver County Lcn K..clne.. Assistant Treasurer Hennepin County Tc....y L. Schwalbc, Administrator Cell (952) 221 -1089 August 31, 2004 Bob Generous, Planner City of Chanhassen 7700 rviarkei Blvd. PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Moon Valley Gravel Mine, Chanhassen Dear Bob: We have previously mailed this letter of comments on the above referenced project. However, at that time we were unable to get board input due to the deadline. We are re-submitting the previous letter dated August 14, 2004 under the new date of August 31, 2004 and including the board's comments on page three. The Lower Minnesota River Watershed District (LMRWD) thanks you for the opportunity to review the Moon Valley Gravel Mine in Chanhassen. We are submitting a summary of our engineering review of the grading, drainage, and erosion control plan for the Moon Valley Gravel Mine located in Chanhassen, Minnesota. The plans that were reviewed included the grading, drainage, and erosion control plan dated July, 16, 2004, and a Stormwater Calculations report dated July 21, 2004. Both were prepared by the Sathre-Bergquist firm. Hydrology and water quantity related comments are as follows: 1. The curve number selection of 69 for existing conditions seems high given the sandy soils prevalent on the site. The curve number should be lowered to 61 to better reflect current site conditions. 2. The curve number selected for proposed land use conditions appears low. (CN=76) For clarity and to better model small storm runoff from the site, the proposed medium density/high density residential areas should be modeled separately from the overall watersheds, rather than lumping them together. This will assist in future reviews in determining if the proposed development is consistent with the current proposal. 3. Times of concentration used in the model from the sheetflow calculations appear to be too long, resulting in underestimated peak discharges. The Manning's "n" value used in the calculations Page 1 of3 Scott COUIlty Goverlllllellt Cellter 200 4th A veIl lie West Sllal(opee, MN 55379 PI,olle: (952) 496-8842, Fa.x:: (952) 496-8844 E-lllail terry..~·@JOJVerl1ll'. COlli Lower Mil111esot(1 River Waterslled District corresponds to dense grass conditions, which are likely optimistic given the slopes of the site. A better estimate can be made using either short grass or unpaved conditions to be conservative, especially given the steep slopes on the project site. 4. Overall, the rate controls provided by the proposed ponds meets the 10 year and 100 year predevelopment discharge rates. However, it does not meet the 2-year predevelopment discharge rate. This could be accommodated by installing a small orifice and overflow weir outlet control structure without drastically raising the high water levels from the 10 and 100 year events. Changes resulting from comments #1-3 may change these results. 5. Drainage to Pond 1 from a portion of WS-5P is not accounted for in the rate control calculations provided for Pond 1. Although this area is not proposed for development, runoff from this area will affect pond operation. Modeling of peak flows and rate control for the 2, 10, and 100 year events should be re-evaluated with a revised watershed for Pond 1. 6. Watershed WS-1 P does not have clearly defined drainage boundaries. Although it does not enter the portion of the site that is to be regarded, it will need to be better defined in order to quantify whether or not flooding will occur over TH212. 7. The proposed drainage diagram appears to show runoff from the Settlers West Development on top of the bluff draining to a concentrated point at the top of the proposed 2.5 : 1 constructed slopes. These concentrated flows must be avoided and prevented in order to prevent severe erosion of the steep slopes. Runoff may need to be piped down the face of the slope at this location. 8. The west end of watershed WS-3P will naturally drain to the channel/wetland to the west, while the ultimate proposed plan indicates it will be directed east to Pond 2. Water quality treatment should be provided prior to discharging to the channel/wetland complex. A temporary sediment basin may need to be installed in this location until final development occurs and redirects runoff to Pond 2. 9. It is not clear how runoff from watershed WS-6P will be directed to the proposed Pond 1. The grading plans show sheet flow to the south, where it will intersect the proposed site access road. Based solely on contours, it appears runoff will sheetflow over the road and then will continue on to TH 212. Details regarding how water will be directed to Pond 1 should be included for review. 10. No details regarding the proposed pond outlets were submitted for review. At a minimum, they must provide skimming up to the 5-year storm event. 11. The plans do not make it clear how runoff from watershed WS-5P leaves the site. High water !evels at any proposed or current outlet may affect the high water levels in Pond 1. 12. The steep slopes proposed for the site (2.5H: 1 V) will require substantial efforts be placed on erosion control during construction and vegetation establishment. The site should be thoroughly reviewed for erosion control measures as the current single lines of silt fence shown on the plan are likely not enough given the height and length of the proposed slopes. Water quality related comments are as follows: 13. The stormwater ponds should be designed to achieve a 60% reduction in average annual phosphorus loads. No details regarding the proposed nutrient removal efficiency of the ponds were provided. Page 2 oj'3 Scott COllllty Goverllluellt Cellter 200 4th Avellue West Sllakopee, MN 55379 PI,ol,e: (952) 496-8842, Fax: (952) 496-8844 E-lllail terrys@JoJVerlllll.cOIII LOJver Millllesota River Waters/led District 14. Pond 1 appears to have a wet volume of 0.71 acre-feet and a mean depth of 2.45 feet. The minimum recommended mean depth is 3 feet for a water quality pond, in order to prevent scour and re-suspension of captured sediment. In addition, at the LMRWD's Board of Manager's meeting held on August 18,2004, the board made a motion of additional comments as follows: It was moved and seconded to: 1. Send the letter out with recommendations that the Pemton land Company's plan be altered to meet these requirements laid out in the August 14, 2004 memorandum and Pemtom land Company should reply to the District for each item in the memorandum. 2. Encourage the City of Chanhassen to work with us in the development of a mutually acceptable agreement to enforce the provisions of the lMRWD 509 Plan and express the expediency of getting the plan in place. If we can't reach a mutual agreement, then the LMRWD will be forced to adopt rules to enforce stormwater management within the City of Chanhassen. 3. We want to hear back from you that through your permitting process you have implemented these standards and if not, why not, and have them send us a copy of the final permit with a plan or conditions adopted. VOTE: Ayes 5; Nays O. Thank you. Sincerely, erry L. Schwalbe District Administrator cc: Lori Haak, Water Resource Coordinator Page 3 oj'3 Scott COlllltv Goverlllllellt Cellter 200 4/h Avellue We,,\'t Sllakopee, MN 55379 PI,olle: (952) 496-8842, Fax: (952) 496-8844 E-lllail ter/J's@JOJVerlllll.cOIII MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT of NATURAL RESOUR(:ES Southwest Metro Otìice, 9925 Valley View Rd, Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Office: 952-826-6760 Fax: 952-826-6767 9/17/04 Jill Sinclair Environmental Resource Coordinator City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 Subject: Moon Valley Gravel Mine Restoration I inventoried the forested land on the eastern side of the property on the 10th of September. The forest identified as Big Woods on the attached 1940 photo. The results are as follows: Size class 20" dialneter and larger Sugar maple Red oak American basswood American elm 1 '800 board feet 1 acrc 866 board feet lacre 266 board feet lacre 266 board feet lacre Total 3,198 board feet lacre Size class 5" diameter to 18" diameter Sugar maple Hickory Hackberry American elm Ironwood 2 cords lacre 1 .3 cords 1 acre .33 cords 1 acre .33 cords /acre .66 cords 1 acre Total 4.62 cords lacre DNR InfomuHion: 651-296-6157, 1-RRR-646-6367 . TTY: 651-296-5484. l-ROO-657-3929 \V\\'\\' .dnr. sta te. nln.llS An Equal ()pportunity Elnployer Who Values Diversity This means that this woods is predominately sugar maple in both the overstory and understory. This forest would be classified as a Big Woods forest remnant from the presettlement era. The attached aerial photo taken 6/15/40 shows this forest being intact at that time. There are a good number of large hardwood trees in the 30" size class that are 120+ years of age. The large trees in the forest are in good condition with little rot found in most of the trees examined. This would be considered a significant forest due to the age, size and condition of the trees found there. Contact my office for further assistance. 'J ) _~ ~ 7~ /, :,"~/~ \ .' ,/ // \~_~4,f',_ /_ ",·z // ,,_/ \../ Alan E. Olson DNR-Forestry Eden Prairie DNR Infonnation: 651-296-6157, 1-888-646-6367 . TTY: 651-296-5484, 1-800-657-3929 \V\V\V .dnr.state.tnn. us An Equal ()pportunity Enlployer Who Values IJiversity rl ~i if , t...~··" I ~~~.t }"" , !j~~ I -- -¡ -" " :!.- ....'......~:....,.. 'ë.~~'j. fI.:.'\!.~~¡':.' ,1~:í~';:;/ . .., :''/f,it " '1'l '~V~_f' {·U . -...cr-=~,;~i . ~,.~. ,~~::.;¡::~~ '~.~?t. , 6I8lI/ .~,~~;.-- ...?:: 1~ ' -.. ~ n. ;¡t!r-' ~..~~ ~ ~ ~: f.~~~~ 1 .... ~t~ ~" .. :-1 ¥ ,..."..,.. . 1,~1:~"1 ' . .~7'~ )... .. ,: ·~l.Þ~., ,:1 'è.../':'~ .' J,:..¡;,.¡ .:\~~~ct;-, "\ ~ ~¿.~. _. ,'.. ~~~~~:J.J,J I '. --- ~ ß . .. l.····:.M-".\·· ~~ ..... 'If' ..~,..,."".... "" ,~,,,:,,,,;..;...~ .."e .... ·l\7·.·... >. ! .,.: ~. . Î ' -. ... ií~ -r / '¡AV';'-: 0; ~.:I "'i. , \ ", 3,¡·~~/ f~~%,(!)':~~_··-~:\ {~~~::l ~~:-".:Ä ~ .r;.--....- I" l(r~~ ~ f~ .~~. ..~.- ... ..... ._~:.-. .. ...~..~.(.\.r..~\' ~', 1f" ~. -õ;..-' .44Ift.' <It. :,,'-- ~r' .._- t::'~ '-.~:'~J ~"'M ~'I# j ___ft}". - ~ . . . .;'1 f.'J,t. ~.'..." 1(;: '; I~~ ; I .. .\ ~~~~I':·i}~;;~· .'.. ....N..fh · /'> ct.' .1\" "'I~{;:i?' . ~,i ~. .;!! r'· f ".... ~ -.. , -................ C . c', . " it.·. ~à., \." ,. ~".,./ ~, .~ ...!~,.......... ~'"' . \~í8?Sl'" 6'- ' .. 6 .¡ï'- , ~ .... ,"'Ie' 1-, . .. ~ :'. t '''',: ~ of ~ " .;.~__ ' . ~.,~;:tt-:- I ~.. .oJ' '..- .' ~~.~~ II" ,~~. " -'J. ) . - J:'#í~J.~~/·'·YÞl' ~: ~~~. , . ..-. lr ,.-~ . ~~.""'t!' .. ~1__L..š-~. ~..~f.~ o:_.~.;;", .~ ,.,"~ , _~ .øI,.~.(', 'n", 4.~ 1 .. 'r'J, \ . t _ ICi ' .. "..,1Þt':. rF' . -;- - .., ¡ ì "t. .,. ~~-6wr"~, I,~... fIt ' .~w,,,., ; . . ..... )~ - . 1I.':iIiIL..",~.:~·· . .~. ' ~~~,.~.,.., :.. ~--.'''. ~ .,.-' "1' ,. .. . ~. ~ ~~ .....,;,' ." ..-.' r,' " ( ~;~. -~ ·f <f: .-;;.;: - ~ The Pemtom Land Company 7597 ANAGRAM DRIVE EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55344 (952) 937-0716 · FAX (952) 937-8635 TO: Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council and Professional Staff SUBJECT: Moon Valley Restoration and Permit DATE: September 27,2004 Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council, and Professional Staff: The City Staff and Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that an interim use permit be approved for Moon Valley gravel pit on August 17, 2004. Prior to that meeting and recommendation, members of the Staff and Planning Commission conducted a field trip to the Moon Valley site and viewed the effects of mining over seventy years. The application we submitted provides for 18.4 acres of use able land out of a total of70 acres. The City Council had great foresight by recommending high-density housing/office/commercial for this location in the Comprehensive Plan. Although the site speaks little to a high quality mix use development today, the future for this site and for the city is truly bright. I asked the Planning Commission to challenge the quality of the trees that exist on the site and the artificial bluff created by mining and to not compare the reuse of this land to a typical development on native terrain. We discussed how the City of Edina became actively involved in the acquisition and development of the Hedberg gravel and concrete operation that is now the home of the magnificent mixed use of Centennial Lakes and Edinborough. This project is considered one of the premiere mixed uses in our country consisting of office, theater, retail, restaurants, and many alternative housing lifestyles surrounding a lake, fountains, parks, and trails. Even though we are only requesting approval of our current application, we ask you, as we asked the Planning Staff and Commission, to think outside of the box and to envision a much larger use exceeding 25 acres or more. After the restoration of the site is completed according to the terms and conditions of your approval, we would like to come before you at a future date with concepts that would greatly expand the amount of land to be used and allow a fulfillment of the City's Comprehensive Plan. I have attached some talking points that I presented to the Planning Commission on August 17, 2004 and a copy of the Urban Land Institute's article on Edinborough and Centennial Lakes. Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council, and Professional Staff September 27,2004 Page 2 We respectfully request the approval of the submitted interim use permit. Sincerely, Daniel J. Herbst President DlliIidt Enclosure(s)