7. Interim Use Permit, 1500 Pioneer Trail I 7 ,op
C ITY O F PC DATE: 8/15/90
IICC DATE: 9/10/90
CHAHAEH .
CASE
t,re► # 90 2 IUP 1 , By: Krauss/v
1
1
STAFF REPORT
. ,
I PROPOSAL: Interim Use Permit to Excavate 190,000 Yards of Material
on the Jeurissen Farm. The stated purpose of the action
is to improve the site's utility for agricultural
I purposes, but the material is being sold to the Eden
Prairie Landfill. ACtion r, C tti f,--I r
ffmb
I V LOCATION: 1500 Pioneer Trail ,-.4 ;�1_��_
i,,...-.
1 fi- APPLICANT: Wangerin Incorporated
8610 Harriet Ave. So. t -' :. 1J coinT sspr.
-i5- 90
� Bloomington, MN 55420
I 1
1 PRESENT ZONING: A2, Agricultural Estate
ACREAGE:
IDENSITY: N/A
ADJACENT ZONING AND
1 LAND USE: N - A-2, Agricultural Use
S - Pioneer Trail, A-2, Agricultural Use
E - A-2, Agricultural Use
IQ W - A-2, Agricultural Use
occ WATER AND SEWER: Not available
I0 PHYSICAL CHARACTER. : The site contains rolling topography with few
W remaining trees. It is in active agricultural
use and contains a homestead with assorted out
I 1.... buildings. The site is bisected by Bluff
Creek and an adjacent wetland.
II2000 LAND USE PLAN: Undesignated/Agricultural
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
III
I
.1
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990 •
' Page 2
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
' The applicants are requesting Interim Use Permit approval to remove
190,000 yards of clay soil from the Jeurissen Farm. The applicant's
stated purpose for the request is to establish improved grades for
' agricultural use and ultimately for the rural residential
development that was conceptually reviewed by the City in 1987. It
is our understanding that the material will be trucked to the
' Flying Cloud Landfill in Eden Prairie where it will be used as
cover material. The top soil on the site will be stripped and
stockpiled prior to grading activity so that it may be respread
over the site for agricultural use in the future. The property is
' currently in agricultural use and is zoned A2. Much of the
impacted area is currently in use for corn crop. No additional
trees will be directly lost through this operation and provisions
' are being made to protect "wetland areas and Bluff Creek which
bisects the site. The proposal is being drafted in a manner
consistent with the newly adopted mining and grading ordinance and
' conditions are being provided to ensure that on-site and off-site
impacts, to the extent possible with a project of this magnitude,
are mitigated.
' Staff has significant reservations with this proposal due to it's
shear size and it's intent. Moving 190,000 yards of dirt requires
20,000 truck movements. Based upon the applicant's projected rate
' of work, this will result in 175 loaded trucks leaving the site
each day with 175 returning. We also note that the applicant's
narrative indicates that the purpose of the earth work is to
"provide a more accessible area for crop lands". Given that the
' site is already being farmed and appears to have been for some
time, we find this premise misleading. It is quite clear that the
primary purpose of this proposal is to export material for it's
11 cash value.
The background of grading on this site is explored in detail below.
' The history of earth work operations on this property does not
serve to enhance staff's comfort level. Grading activity was
conducted this past spring under a permit that was issued by the
Engineering Department several years ago. In hindsight, the permit
' should not have been issued by a staff member since it required
City Council approval which was never sought or granted. In spite
of this, staff attempted to work to honor the permit and allowed
' the applicant to remove the 20,000 yards which had been permitted.
Upon concluding that a greater amount of fill had been removed then
allowed, several stop work orders were placed on the property but
' they were run over and ignored. Grading work was finally stopped
but not without the threat of legal action on behalf of the City.
The operation at that time generated a series of inquiries and
complaints due to truck traffic hauling on Pioneer Trail and from
' the operator of Moon Valley who was concerned about unfair
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
Page 3 '
treatment. The applicant has repeatedly indicated that he would
bring legal action against the City if the permit is not approved
as requested and on his schedule. Staff has asked the City
Attorney to comment on this and it is concluded that the city has
and continues to act in a legally responsible and defensible
manner. In our opinion, these threats are without merit and
neither this nor the applicant's contractual obligations to sell
the material should have any bearing on the Planning Commission's
and City Council's action on the matter. ,
In spite of these reservations, staff is recommending approval
subject to appropriate conditions. We believe that the applicant
was ultimately able to work with staff to develop a proposal that
was consistent with ordinance guidelines. Since it was never the
intent of the new ordinance to completely halt this type of
operation, staff is not in a position to confront some of the more
philosophical aspects of allowing this to occur in the community.
In reviewing this application, however, we do advise caution on the
part of the Planning Commission and City Council. We feel this
caution is warranted since this is one of the first applications to
be brought in under the new ordinance and since the volume of
material is so large. We note that the handling of applications
such as this will establish a precedent and legal basis for actions
on future related permits.
Staff is attempting to minimize impacts from this operation by
recommending the imposition of strict conditions. On-site
environmental impacts can, we believe, be dealt with. Off-site
traffic and related impacts are more difficult to control. Staff
reviewed the need to have an Environmental Assessment Worksheet on
this request. We found that it does not trip a mandatory EAW so
that if one is desired, it must be requested by the city or
petitioned by impacted residents.
The recommended conditions of approval are extensive and we hope
comprehensive. The applicant should be aware that if conditions of
approval are violated, the ordinance allows for the operation to be
shut down and staff would ask the City Council to revoke the
permit.
BACKGROUND
In 1987 the applicant, along with Sever Peterson and Gil Laurent '
were given a conceptual review of plans to plat their property for
rural residential use under the pre-1987 Zoning Ordinance.
Preparation of a formal plat was granted a time extension by the
City Council due to uncertainty regarding the ultimate location of
Highway 212. This time extension was terminated with the official
mapping of the highway by the city in 1989. However, in the spring '
I
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
' Page 4
of 1990 the City Council granted a further extension until the
final EIS for the highway was approved.
CHRONOLOGICAL HISTORY OF JEURISSEN GRADING PERMIT
' August 1, 1988: Application filled out, permit issued for
installation of culvert across Bluff Creek and
excavation of 21,481 cubic yards. It is our
' understanding that the permit was issued to
correct damage caused by the July, 1987 super
storm. The permit was issued by a staff
' member who is no longer with the city. The
staff member erred in issuing the permit since
earthwork of this type required 'City Council
approved. The permit was good for 120 days.
' Spring. 1989: Applicant requested extension of permit until
June 15, 1989 because work had never been
' started. Allan Larson gave permission.
January, 1990: Applicant (Loren Habegger) requested another
extension because the work had never been
' completed. Staff (Gary Warren and Dave
Hempel) extended permit until June 30, 1990.
Again, the validity of issuing the permit
' could have been questioned, but staff believed
it was appropriate to honor the original
permit.
' February. 1990: Excavation operation and culvert installation
commenced.
February 14 . 1990: Staff concluded that the amount of material
excavated met or exceeded permit allowances.
In discussions 'with the applicant they
initially agreed that this was the case.
Certified letter to Loren Habbegger regarding
Jeurissen excavation permit. Letter outlined
' understanding with regards to erosion control,
traffic signing, limits of excavation, tree
removal and the need for a conditional use •
permit for excavation beyond the allowed
' 21,461 cubic yards.
May, 1990: Excavation operations commenced again. Stop
work order was issued by Dave Hempel on May 7,
1990. It was ignored by the applicant.
' May 9. 1990: Certified letter from Gary Warren to Wangerin
Excavating formally notifying that they
I
I
I
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
Page 5
(Wangerin) were in violation of the stop work
order and is in jeopardy of civil and criminal
action if they continue.
May 18, 1990: Gary Warren witnessed hauling activities on
the Jeurissen property.
May 21, 1990: Engineering and Planning staff and the City
Attorney met with the applicants and their
attorneys to gain agreement on the stop work
order. The new grading ordinance was
described along with procedures for
application and review of request.
Roger Knutson, City Attorney, sent letter to
Andrew Druck summarizing the meeting between
city staff and Wangerin, Inc. and Wangerin's
attorney. Letter confirmed that all parties
agreed that all mining operations will cease
no later than the close of business on
Wednesday, May 23, 1990 and that mining may
not proceed after that date until a
conditional use permit is issued by the City.
May 22 , 1990: Wangerin's attorney (Andrew Druck) sent a
letter to Wangerin, Inc. recommending
excavating activities cease and desist.
May 29, 1990: Dave Hempel witnessed the mining operation had
commenced again. At the direction of Gary
Warren, Dave Hempel placed another stop work
order sign on the property. After some
conversations, Wangerin decided to comply with
the stop work order.
July 13 , 1990: The applicants filed a formal application for
an Interim Use Permit for grading at the site.
The initial application was for 100,000 cubic
yards, but this was ultimately raised to
190,000 cubic yards of material.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE EXCAVATING. MINING. FILLING AND GRADING
ORDINANCE
Section 7 of the ordinance provides a series of standards against
which large scale grading applications are to be reviewed. The
following constitutes staff's review and findings. These are
reviewed in the sequence in which they are provided in the
ordinance.
11
I
Jeurissen. Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
' Page 6
Section 7-40 - Fees
' The ordinance allows the City to determine the fee schedule for
each permit and that each permit must be annually reviewed by the
City Engineer. Section 7-41 provides for an irrevocable letter of
' credit that will be required to ensure compliance with conditions
of approval.
Finding
Staff is proposing that a $30,000 letter of credit be required
to ensure compliance with conditions outlined below. The
' letter of credit would cover site restoration, preparing as-
built grading plan upon completion of each phase to verify
work in compliance with plans, maintenance of adjoining roads
' including repair of damage directly attributable to truck
traffic and to keeping them free of mud and debris, and for
maintenance of erosion control and dust control measures. In
addition, a substantial amount of staff time will be required
' to oversee this project. The Engineering Department has
proposed that the following fee schedule be required. It is
taken out of the Uniform Building Code that has been adopted
' by the City. It requires that a permit fee of $787.56 be paid
and that all City and County staff time used to monitor and
inspect the operation be paid at a rate of $30.00 per hour.
' Staff will document the time on a monthly basis and bill the
applicant.
Section 7-42 - Setbacks
The ordinance requires that a setback of 100 feet from existing
' street rights-of-way and 300 feet from adjoining property lines be
required for mining activities.
' Finding
The current proposal does not 'comply with this requirement.
Grading activity is being proposed virtually adjacent to the
' north property line of the Jeurissen parcel. However, we
believe that imposition of this standard is a matter of
interpretation. It should be noted that a revised concept
' plat indicating how development could occur has not been
provided. The setback requirements in the ordinance were
specifically designed to deal with continuous mining of sand,
gravel, clay, etc. such as occurs on a long term fixed basis
' in the Moon Valley operation. The current proposal
purportedly is being used in part to support agricultural use
on the property by lowering the grades and making agricultural
activity more feasible. The applicants have also indicated
I
I
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
Page 7 '
verbally that it would support future development of the site
for low density residential uses since the grades are at -
present too steep to permit this type of development. The
ordinance allows grading activity designed primarily for
future site development or continued use to occur anywhere
without being subject to setback requirements. In spite of
our reservations with the proposal, we believe that this
exception applies in this case, thus, the setback standard is
not applicable.
Section 7-43 - Fencing
The ordinance requires fencing for areas which will be converted to
steep grades or where on site ponding exists if the Council
determines that a safety hazard exists.
Finding '
It is our opinion that safety hazards such as those envisioned
by the ordinance will not be created by the proposed activity,
therefore, we are recommending that this requirement be waived
in accordance with provisions provided in the ordinance.
Section 7-44 - Appearance and Screening
The ordinance requires that the visual impact-of grading and mining
operations be minimized and that where necessary, screening be
provided.
Finding ,
The site is in a relatively remote location in an agricultural
district. It is not a long term operation but rather a
temporary permit. Therefore, we do not believe that this
requirement is applicable and that the requirement for
screening should be waived as outlined by the ordinance.
Section 7-45 - Operations, Noise, Hours, Explosives, Dust, Water,
Pollution, Top Soil Preservation
A. Maximum Noise Levels as measured at the perimeter of the site
shall be within limits set by the MPCA and by the Federal EPA.
Finding
Staff does not envision a problem directly from grading
operations on this site due to it's remote location. However,
truck activity will undoubtedly cause noise levels to rise on
the haul routes. A condition is being provided that noise
levels not exceed MPCA and EPA limits. If noise testing is
II
IIJeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990 .
II Page 8
required by the city, the cost should be paid by the
Iapplicant.
B. Earth work is permitted only during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to
6:00 p.m. , Monday through Saturday and prohibited on national
1 holidays.
IFinding
The applicants have indicated in their narrative that they are
I willing to comply with this requirement. An appropriate
condition is provided. Staff is further concerned that the
large number of truck turning movements that will result could
adversely impact traffic flow during peak rush hour periods.
I . If, in the opinion of the city and/or the Carver County
Sheriff or Engineer, conflicts occur, staff is requesting
authority to prohibit truck movements before 8:00 a.m. and
I after 4:30 p.m. , the proposed condition is worded accordingly.
Furthermore, if grading activity is not completed until next
year, staff is recommending that all grading activity be
I stopped during the U. S. Open since event traffic will be
using Pioneer Trail.
C. Operators are required to use all practical means to eliminate
IIvibration on adjacent property from equipment operation.
Finding
IAgain, staff foresees no problem due to the distant location
of the site.
II D. Operators shall comply with all applicable regulations for the
protection of water quality.
IFinding
The stream and associated wetland will be protected by an
II extensive erosion control system. Maintenance of erosion
control around these features and around all disturbed areas
and stockpile sites will be a condition of approval. A revised
erosion control plan is required. Controls need to be
I established along the entire creek corridor, wetland and
around the perimeter of the topsoil stockpiles. In addition,
Watershed District approval is listed as a condition. The
I applicants have contacted the Watershed District and expect to
have action taken on their proposal later this month. Staff
has spoken to the Watershed District and they requested that
II no grading activity be allowed below the 869' 100 year flood
elevation. Staff is proposing that no grading occur below the
1
I
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
Page 9 I
971' elevation since the minimum allowable building elevation
is 2 ft. above the 100 year flood. Plans should be revised
accordingly. Lastly, staff has worked with the applicants to
develop a phasing plan for this operation. The phasing plan
will be utilized to ensure that the amount of area disturbed
at any one time is kept to a minimum. The first phase of
grading activity will occur in the area where activity was
halted last spring. It is hoped that in this manner this
problem area can be restored and revegetated as soon as
possible. Lastly, grading activity this past spring resulted
in impact to the creek. Debris, rock and what appears to be
a large section of culvert have washed into it. The applicant
should be required to clean and restore the creek channel
during the first phase of the operation.
E. Operators shall comply with all regulations for the
protection of wetlands.
Finding '
No grading activity will be allowed to occur in the wetlands
and erosion control will be provided to protect this area.
F. Operators shall comply with all requirements of the Watershed
District where the property is located.
Finding
See above.
G. All top soil shall be retained at the site until complete
restoration of the site has taken place according to the
restoration plan. '
Finding
Two large stock piles for black dirt and top soil are being '
provided on site. Plans call for spreading the top soil back
out on disturbed properties after the operation is completed
so that agricultural use of the property may be continued.
Staff is providing conditions of approval that will require
site restoration on a phased basis with the immediate planting
of ground cover on disturbed areas prior to initiation of work '
on the next phase. The Carver County Soil and Conservation
Service has reviewed the proposal. They indicated that slopes
over 18% on soils found at the site should be permanently
vegetated with an acceptable ground cover due to its high
runoff potential. The northern edge of the excavation will
have 30% grades and will become unsuitable for field crops.
An appropriate condition is provided.
.
I
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
Page 10
H. Operators shall use all practical means to reduce the amount
' of dust, smoke and fumes caused by the operations. When
atmospheric or other conditions make it impossible to prevent
dust from migrating off site, mining operations shall cease.
Finding
Again, staff does not anticipate a major problem with these
' impacts due to the site's remote location, however,
appropriate conditions of approval have been provided.
' I. To control dust and minimize tracking of sand, gravel and dirt
onto public streets, internal private roads to any public
roadway shall be paved with asphalt or concrete for a distance
of 300 feet to the intersection of the public roadway.
Alternate means of controlling this problem may be accepted by
the city.
' Finding
Staff anticipates a potentially significant problem with the
' tracking of debris out onto public rights-of-way due to the
high volume of trucks that will be utilized. Conditions have
been provided that would require that the applicant sweep
streets, if necessary, on a daily basis to remove mud and
' debris. We are also recommending that some type of debris
trap be required at the driveway entrance to Pioneer Trail to
minimize the amount of material tracked onto the right-of-way.
The applicant should prepare a trap design for staff approval.
J. All haul routes to and from the mine shall be approved by the
' City and shall only use streets that can safely accommodate
the traffic.
Finding
' Trucks exiting and entering the site will be using Pioneer
Trail which is a county road designed to accommodate
' relatively high traffic volumes and heavy axle weights. No
other haul road is permitted by this permit. If other routes
are desired, staff will refer the matter back to the City
' Council. The County Engineer has submitted a letter outlining
his concerns relative to the proposed operation. He believes
that 10,000 trucks exiting the site and 10,000 trucks arriving
will have a significant and measurable adverse impact on the
useful life of Pioneer Trail. He is requesting that the City
investigate the potential of requiring a road impact fee so
that funds can be held for the future repair or replacement of
a highway that he believes will fail prematurely. The matter
of an impact fee was discussed with the City Attorney and
I
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
Page 11 '
unfortunately, he believed that such an impact fee may not be
legally defensible. Thus, the concern remains but there does
not appear to be a direct way in which the City can deal with
it.
The City can and we believe should require the applicant to be
responsible for road damage that is directly attributable to
the hauling. Therefore, we are recommending that financial
guarantees be required to cover repair expenses. Prior to the
start of grading, the condition of Pioneer Trail should be
reviewed and documented by the City and County Engineering
Departments so that responsibility for damage can be
established. In addition, traffic volumes on Pioneer Trail
are a concern. The Pioneer Trail/Highway 101 intersection
located a small distance to the east is somewhat hazardous.
It is reasonable to assume that significant truck volumes may
exacerbate matters. Staff is recommending that signs be
posted at all times at the site indicating trucks hauling in
a manner acceptable to the Engineering Department. We will
further be requesting that the County Sheriff's Department
perform periodic speed and weight checks along the route. If
trucks are found to be violating traffic safety laws, staff
will require that the operation be shut down and will ask the
City Council to terminate the Interim Use Permit.
Section 7-46 - Restoration Standards
The ordinance provides a series of standards outlining site
restoration. These are reviewed below.
A. The plan must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan
and Zoning Ordinance.
Finding
The present Comprehensive Plan illustrates this area as '
agricultural use and the applicant's proposal to restore top
soil for agricultural purposes is consistent with this. The
draft land use plan anticipates that this area will be in the
designated 1995 study surrounding Hwy. 212. However, at this
time the plan does not give guidance as to what future uses
may be. The City has given preliminary approval for a low
density residential plat for this site. Final platting has
been allowed to be postponed until Hwy. 212 EIS is completed.
The applicants have not provided information indicating that
the grading is suitable and consistent with this plan.
However, this plan will need to be revised in light of the
Hwy. 212 plans in any case. It is reasonable to think that
modifying some of the grades on the site could prove to be
1
I .
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
' Page 12
useful for future residential development if this were to
' occur. Based upon these findings, staff believes that the
proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning
Ordinance.
' B. Restoration shall be a continuing operation occurring as
quickly as possible after extraction operation has moved.
' Finding
A phased restoration plan has been developed by the applicant
and will be enforced by City staff.
C. All banks and slopes shall be left in accordance with the
restoration plans submitted with the permit application.
Finding
' Staff will work to ensure that the plan is complied with. We
are recommending that an as-built grading plan be provided at
the completion of each phase so that staff may ascertain the
volume of material that has been removed and that compliance
' has been provided with the approved plan. Provision of these
plans will be at the expense of the applicant.
ID. Slopes, graded areas and backfill areas shall be surfaced with
adequate top soil to secure and hold ground cover. Such
ground cover shall be tended as necessary until it is self
' sustaining.
Finding
Preservation of top soil is being provided on the plan and
staff will ensure that it is spread as required. Financial
guarantees will be used to ensure that ground cover survives.
E. All water areas resulting excavation g from av n shall be eliminated
upon restoration of the site.
' Finding
' This condition is not applicable. This condition is designed
to deal more with gravel quarries that excavate rock, deep
pits or other features.
1
I
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
Page 13 ,
F. No part of the restoration area which is planned for uses
other than open space or agricultural shall be at an elevation
lower than the minimum required for connection sanitary or
storm sewer.
Finding '
At the present time and into the foreseeable future, this area
is not expected to be served by public utilities. Since there
are no lines anywhere in close proximity to this property, it
is impossible to estimate what the minimum elevations might
be. Inasmuch as grading activity has taken place in elevated
areas on the site, there are no obvious problems that would
develop if utilities were available at some point in the
future. A condition described previously will ensure that the
site is not lowered below the 100 year flood elevation and is
at least minimally suitable for building sites.
G. Provide a landscaping plan illustrating reforestation, ground
cover, wetland restoration or other features.
Finding ,
Inasmuch as this is agricultural land that will be put back to
agricultural use when the operation is done, we do not believe
a landscaping plan and reforestation plan is required. ,
However, ground cover must be established and a condition is ,
being provided that ground cover must be placed on disturbed
areas on a phase basis as soon as excavation work is completed
and that ground cover will be approved by staff for
suitability.
•
INTERIM USE PERMIT STANDARDS
Mining operations are allowed in the A2 District as an interim use
permit. The ordinance provides that interim use permits are
reviewed under the general issuance standards established for
conditional use permits, Section 20-232, of the ordinance. The
following constitutes a compilation of the general issuance
standards and staff's findings for each.
1. Will not be detrimental to or enhance the public health, i
safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the
neighborhood or the city.
* The proposed earth work is a temporary operation and is
being reviewed as such. Upon removal of the 200,000
yards of material and site restoration, the project is
completed. This factor differentiates the request
I
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
' Page 14
somewhat from longer term gravel mining operations which
' could operate for a number of years out of a single
location. Conditions of approval are proposed that
should diminish, not if completely remove, dangers to
public health, safety, comfort, convenience, and impact
on the surrounding neighborhood. The site is relatively
remote from neighboring residences. Most of the impact
in the community will occur from increased traffic levels
and truck movements on Pioneer Trail. Unfortunately,
short of denying the application, there does not appear
to be much that can be done about this.
2. Will be consistent with the objectives of the cit 's
Y
comprehensive plan and this chapter.
* The City's current Comprehensive Plan envisioned a
continuance of agricultural uses in this area. The draft
' Comprehensive plan currently being prepared does not
represent a departure from the current Plan, but does
incorporate the site in the 1995 study area due to it's
' proximity to Hwy. 212. This, however, does not imply
that any decisions have been made regarding this property
that would render it incompatible for agricultural uses.
The applicant's purported goal in requesting this permit
' is to revise grades to improve the site's utility for
agricultural uses. At the same time, the case is made by
the applicant that the utility of the site for low
' density residential uses, which are also an approved use
of this property, will also be improved. Therefore,
staff concludes that the application is consistent with
the City's Comprehensive Plan.
3. 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.
* Grading operations are by nature an intensive use with
significant potential for off site impact. However, as
noted above, the site is relatively remote, therefore,
' this potential is greatly minimized. Once the activity
is completed and the land returned either to active
agricultural use or developed as a rural residential
subdivision, the site will be compatible with the
' surrounding area.
I
I
I
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
Page 15
4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned
neighboring uses. ,
* After completion of the operation and site restoration,
there will be no hazard or disturbance to existing or
planned neighboring uses.
5. 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.
* The use is a temporary one that will result in no
permanent development of the site. Therefore, it will
have no short range or long range impact on essential
public facilities and services.
6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities
and services and will not be detrimental to the economic
welfare of the community. ,
* The use is a temporary one that will result in no
permanent development of the site. Therefore, it will
not have short range or long range impact on public
facilities and services and will not be detrimental to
the community.
7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials,
equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental
to any persons, property or the general welfare because of
excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare,
odors, rodents, or trash.
* The proposed earth work does have the potential of
producing significant traffic impacts and may also result
in noise, smoke and fume problems. Conditions of
approval provided by staff and outlined in the earth work
ordinance should prove to be effective in minimizing most
of these concerns.
8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not '
create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or
surrounding public thoroughfares.
* As noted previously, this operation does have a
significant potential for producing traffic impacts.
There will be approximately 350 truck movements into and ,
out of the site every day the use is in operation.
I
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
' Page 16
Pioneer Trail is already a busy street and the
possibility does arise for traffic safety conflicts.
Conditions of approval have been proposed to address
these concerns, although given the volume of traffic
anticipated, complete elimination of impact is not likely
to be possible.
9. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar
' access, natural, scenic or historic features of major
significance.
* The proposal will not result in any significant impact to
any of the above mentioned features. A creek and wetland
located on the property will be protected from impact.
10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area.
* The area that is to be excavated is currently an active
agricultural use. It is not visible from many off site
locations and contains no significant natural features or
trees. Therefore, we conclude that the change in grade
being proposed will not have any significant aesthetic
impact on the surrounding area.
11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values.
' * The proposed use should have no long term impact on
surrounding property values.
' 12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in
this article.
' * The ordinance provides specific and detailed standards
for earth work permits which are explored in detail
above.
' SUMMARY
' Staff has a number of reservations with the proposal that primarily
center upon it's magnitude and the lack of a clearly defined
benefit for the community. The resulting imposition of 20,000
' truck movements on local streets raises serious concerns for public
safety. However, after reviewing the proposal in detail, we have
concluded that it is generally consistent with the guidelines
established by the new earth work ordinance. Staff notes that the
' new ordinance was not developed to put a stop to this type of
operation but rather to allow the City to exercise a reasonable
amount of control over it. In spite of our reservations, we
believe that the conditions of approval that are proposed should be
able to minimize if not completely eliminate off site and on site
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
Page 17 '
impacts. There is a significant amount of history regarding
development proposals on this site and more recently, grading
activity, that staff, working with the City Attorney put a stop to
this spring. Staff's recommendations- on this current matter are
not influenced in any way by these previous actions. We believe
that relative to the grading permit, the City operated in a
responsible manner and is under no legal or moral pressure to act
favorably on this current request. However, when all of the
factors reviewed in this report are assessed, staff finds that
there is only one recommendation that we can make and that is that
this item be approved with appropriate conditions.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION I
The Planning Commission reviewed the request on Wednesday, August
15, 1990. They discussed this proposal at length, devoting a great '
deal of time to the magnitude of the operation that is being
proposed and to the poor response and management of the site that
had been exhibited by the applicant to date. The Commission
indicated a belief that the Planning staff's recommendation provide
a comprehensive list of conditions for controlling the operation,
but suggested several refinements. Staff had recommended that a
$30,000 letter of credit be required to ensure proper management
and operation of the site. The Planning Commission asked that
staff review this amount preferring that the amount of the bond be
increased given the magnitude of the operation. Staff has since
reviewed this matter with the City Engineer. It was concluded that
although the letter of credit amount could be increased, that the
$30,000 being proposed is probably sufficient since there are
numerous safeguards built into the monitoring program. The
monitoring being envisioned will allow city staff to shut down the
operation in short order should they cease to operate it correctly.
Therefore, we will leave the $30,000 letter of credit as adequate.
However, condition 1 has been modified so that it is clear that the
letter of credit, in addition to guaranteeing the maintenance of
erosion control, site restoration, preparation of as-built plans,
repair of roads and control of nuisances, would also cover the
costs of daily site monitoring by the Engineering Department and
related costs of patrolling area roads as required. Condition 2
pertains to the fee schedule provided by the Uniform Building Code
for a permit and for the hourly rate charged for site monitoring.
The Planning Commission modified the condition so that it is clear
that the $30.00 per hour charge for monitoring and inspection
applies not only to city and county staff, but more specifically to
County Sheriff's Deputies and Highway Patrol as well. As noted in
the staff report, these organizations may be called on to do speed
and weight checks and other safety patrols if required. Condition
4 pertains to the hours of operation. The ordinance normally
allows operations to be conducted from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. ,
Mondays through Saturdays. The ordinance would also allow the city
I
I
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
Page 18
to establish more stringent hours of operation if these are
believed to be appropriate. The Planning Commission objected to
the operating of large numbers of trucks on Saturdays when many
area residents are at their homes. The Planning Commission
recommended that the hours of operation be changed to restrict them
to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday. The last action
of the Planning Commission was to add Condition 12 which states
that prior to the issuance of any permit, that existing erosion
' control problems must be remedied to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. Staff has no objection to any of these changes and they
have been incorporated into the current recommendation.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Interim Use Permit #90-2 to excavate material
from the Jeurissen farm be approved subject to the following
conditions. Violation of these conditions will result in the
immediate suspension of operations by city staff with the permit
' being brought back to the City Council for review and possible
revocation.
1. Submit a $30, 000 letter of credit in a format acceptable to
the City. The letter of credit will be used to ensure the
following:
' - cover the cost of daily site monitoring by the
Engineering Department and patrolling of area roads as
required by Carver County Sheriff's Deputies and the
State Highway Patrol;
maintenance of erosion control;
- site restoration on a phase basis;
- preparation of "as-built" grading plans preparing
' demonstrating compliance with approved plans, on a phased
basis;
- repair of haul roads due to damage caused by the
operation as determined by city and county staff;
- Removal of mud and debris from haul roads as frequently
' as required by city and county staff;
control of dust and other nuisances;
- noise analysis and other testing if required;
2. Pay a Uniform Building Code grading permit fee of $787.56.
City and county staff as well as Carver County Sheriff's
I
I
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
Page 19 1
Deputies and State Highway Patrol staff time to monitor and
inspect the operation is to be charged to the applicant at a
rate of $30.00 per hour.
3. Noise levels stemming from the operation are not to exceed
MnPCA and EPA regulations. If the city determines that there
is a problem warranting such tests shall be paid for by the
applicant.
4. Hours of operation are limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. , '
Monday through Friday and prohibited on national holidays. If
the City Engineer determines that traffic conflicts result due
to rush hour traffic flows, the hours of operation will be
appropriately restricted. No activity will be permitted
during the U. S. Open Tournament.
5. Provide a revised erosion control plan for staff approval.
The revised plan should provide full protection for the creek,
wetland and drainage areas. Erosion controls to be
established and approved by the city prior to the start of
excavation activity. Failure to maintain erosion control will
result in revocation of the permit. Under the first phase of
the operation, the applicant shall clean and restore the creek
channel to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Submit a revised grading plan prepared by a professional
engineer indicating that no area will be excavated below the
971' elevation to ensure that homes can be built above the
969 ' 100 flood elevation in the future. i
6. Obtain approval of the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed
District and maintain the operation in full compliance with
their requirements. 1
7. Excavation to be phased in accordance with approved plans.
As-built grading plans prepared by a professional engineer
indicating finished grades shall be prepared by the applicant
for each phase, for city approval, to demonstrate compliance
with approved plans.
8. Site restoration shall be completed on a phased basis before
work is allowed to proceed on the following phase. Provide a
revised restoration plan indicating depth of top soil and
ground cover for city approval. Slopes over 18% are to be
permanently vegetated with an acceptable ground cover.
9. The applicant will be held responsible for controlling dust I
and fumes from the site. A plan providing details of the
method to be employed to clean truck tires before they exit
onto the public right-of-way is required for staff approval.
11
•
I
Jeurissen Interim Use Permit
August 15, 1990
1 Page 20
It shall be installed prior to the start of work. It shall
1 further be the applicant's responsibility to clean the public
right-of-way as often as required by staff.
10. Pioneer Trail is the only permissible haul road in Chanhassen.
1 Other routings will require review and approval by the City
Council. Appropriate "trucks hauling" signage shall be posted
and kept in good condition. Prior to the start of work, the
' condition of the haul road will be documented by the city and
county staff and the applicant will be held financially
responsible for all damage that, in their opinion, is caused
by the operation.
11. The city will work with the County Sheriff to coordinate speed
. and weight checks. If trucks are violating traffic laws,
staff will require that the operation be shut down and will
ask the City Council to revoke the permit.
1 12. Prior to the issuance of any permit, existing erosion control
problems must be remedied to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
1 ATTACHMENTS
1. Memo from Sr. Engineering Technician dated August 10, 1990.
1 2. Application.
3. List of abutting property owners.
4. Reduced copies of existing conditions, proposed grading plans
and final grading plan.
5. Letter from Roger Knutson dated August 9, 1990.
6. Letter from Roger Gustafson dated August 3, 1990.
7. Uniform Building Code Fee schedule.
1 8. Memo from Scott Harr dated August 10, 1990.
9. Planning Commission Minutes dated August 15, 1990.
1
i
i
1
i
1
I
4 CITY of
4
II
llir
1:111111111111411:11: 11 II
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 II
II
MEMORANDUM
TO: Paul Krauss, City Planner I
FROM: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician /44KL-
DATE: August 9 , 1990 II
SUBJ: Interim Use/Grading Permit for Jeurissen Property
II
Grading Permit File No. 88-4
Upon review of the proposed grading plans prepared by Wangerin 1
Inc. dated July 2, 1990, revised July 31, 1990, I offer the
following comments and recommendations:
II
Site Conditions
The site consists of rolling farm land with few stands of II
hardwood trees adjacent to Bluff Creek and along the north
property line. The site is bisected by Bluff Creek.
II
As you may recall, Mr. Jeurissen was previously issued a permit
for culvert installation and removal of 21,481 cu. yds. of
material to repair washout damage by the 1987 superstorm. This
II
work has taken place this spring in the area of Phase I. The
applicant has left the site in a very unmanageable condition with
very steep side slopes and is lacking vegetative cover which has
II
caused severe erosion from the spring rains into Bluff Creek
which is a DNR protected waterway.
Proposed Grading I
The project is proposed to be executed in five phases. I
Grading in Phases 1 and 2 proposes leveling a large hill
approximately 24 feet high in order to prepare the site for
II
future development possibilities. The applicant has indicated on
the plans to preserve the existing trees on the site. However,
the applicant also indicated this with the initial permit
(Phase I) but in fact did remove trees along the creek banks in
II
order to expedite his excavation operations. The plans propose
to stockpile topsoil on the site so that it may be respread at
the completion of the project. I
U
Paul Krauss
August 9 , 1990
Page 2
Grading in Phases 3 , 4 and 5 propose shaving the hillside
' approximately two to six feet. This will steepen the already
steep slope conditions to approximately 3 to 1 ( 30+%) . According
to the Carver Country Soil Survey Manual, soils in the area
' consist of the Hayden series. Combined with the proposed steep
slopes ( 30%) these soils are not suitable from an erosion
standpoint for cultivated crops. The moisture storage capacity
is moderately high and runoff is very rapid. Therefore, the
' potential exists for severe erosion with cultivated crops. The
soils manual recommends the area be established in permanent
vegatation, i .e. wooden, pastured or hay crop (see Attachment
No. 1) . The applicant is also not proposing to remove any trees
within these three phases.
' Erosion Control Measures
The plans propose a silt fence to be installed adjacent to Bluff
' Creek and at the toe of the slope along Phases 3, 4 and 5.
Staff feels due to the potential for erosion and environmental
harm to Bluff Creek that the silt fence should be replaced with
' the City' s Type-3 erosion control fence. Due to the large number
of vehicles traveling in and out of the site it is recommended
that the streets be cleaned daily and a 200 foot long
construction access road be maintained to help prevent tracking
of material out into the county road ( see Attachment No. 2) .
' Recommended Conditions
1. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permit
' requirements by the Watershed District.
2 . The applicant shall pay a permit fee in the amount of $787.50
in accordance with the Uniform Building Code (UBC) Table
' No. 70B, Grading Permit Fees. In addition, all inspections
of the operation by City and County staff is to be charged to
the applicant at a rate of $30 per hour.
•
3 . Silt fence shall be replaced with the City' s Type III erosion
control fence. •
' 4 . The applicant shall provide the City with security in the
form of cash escrow or Letter of Credit in the amount of
$30,000 to cover any road damage, maintain erosion control
' measures and site restoration.
5 . The applicant shall supply the City with a mylar as-built
survey prepared by a professional engineer upon completion to
verify the grading is in compliance with the proposed plan.
I
11
Paul Krauss I
August 9 , 1990
Page 3
II
6 . The applicant shall construct a gravel construction entrance
200 feet long at all access points onto public roads. I
7 . Site restoration shall be completed on a phased basis before
work is allowed to proceed on the following phase.
II
jms
Attachments : 1. Carver County Soils & Water Facsimile
II
2 . Gravel Construction Access
II
1
1
II
II
I
II
I
II
I
II
II
II
CARVER SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE
' 219 EAST FRONTAGE ROADfa
WACONIA, MN. 55357
TELEPHONE 442-5101 is-do A cr T a.
FAX 442-5102 ✓*I 1U. <J ?141
DATE - - ~ q. -z rrkr, �
F Rom: �Ct '---f-I C ;sr � _-------------�
YOUR PROJECT UPDATE •
' -
SITE FIELD CHECKED DATE
- SURVEY NEEDED
1 -__-- SURVEY COMPLETED
-- DRAFTING A ROUGH PLAN
_ ROUGH PLAN DRAFTED
- STATE COST SHARE FUNDS APPLIED FOR
- STATE COST SHARE FUNDS APPROVED
-__ FEDERAL COST SHARE FUNDS APPLIED FOR
-- FEDERAL FEDERAL COST SHARE FUNDS APPROVED
' - PLAN OUT FOR APPROVAL
DRAFTING RECOMMENDATIONS
-- WILL WILL PRESENT TO THE DISTRICT BOARD ON
I - .--- YOU WILL NEED TO CONSULT (SEE NOTES)
NOTES; /
(J 19(0 cS 10?e mot, /STS W 1L k 't 4S h C r•►1 4 i. *- k.7
' S � 2
t/' g t V1 €- #
V 11 e — ( . . .h - er Prime rot% .�Cboo
ri7L J (fiv ) /clew 4.4 e) Pf d-
CN a .54 Coo b . f/a ,, w o k t aL bc,
e 170„, } ` c ; w, k ors ��---�" b .S, C, f. •
1
' ATTACHMENT NO. 1
AUG- 5-90 THU 11 :5X f'VQ f TY Cn T 1 OI4T N X11 rnm G nw nn a 297
AUG— 9-90 THU 11 :53 CYR CTY SOIL AND H2O CON 6124425 102 P. 03
f MID"
gor a full description of a mapping unit, read both the description of the ni
III
�
6, for approximate acreage and proportionate extent of c
For table 1, page properties of the soils, turn to the • i
For facts about the engineering prop er
section beginning on page 711,7
Building-1
De- Capability Woodland site
acribed unit , group group
Map Mapping unit page Symbol Page Dumber Page Number Al
symbol
Al Alluvial land
9 IIw-2 36 8 51 11 74+
'VIw-1 43 9 51 11
Bc Biscay loam 9 i 1 IN-1 35 8 51 9 Au Alluvial land, frequently flooded 9 11w-3. 33 9 51 9 ll
Bd Biscay loam, sandy subsoil variant -
PhD Burnsville-Hayden complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes - 11 IIIe-5 38 14 50 5
111 2
WIC Burnsville-Hayden complex, 6 to 12 percent slopes 11 IVe-3
BuD Burnsville-Hayden sandy looms, 12 to 18 percent 11 VIe-2 42 5 50 6
slopes
DuE Burnsville-Hayden sandy loans, 18 to 25 percent
slopes 11 VIIe-2 43 5 50 7
Ca Canisteo silty clay loam 12 IIw-1 35 8 51 9 i
Cd Canisteo silty clay loam, depressional 12 12 II
Iww-1 39 9 51 10 74
-Ch Chalice •a silty clay loam 12 IN-1 35 8 51 11
Cm Cornfrey silty clay loam 13 VIw-1 43 9 51 11
Co Comfrey silty clay loam, frequently flooded 14 IIw-1 35 8 51' 9
Cs Cordova silty clay loam 14 IN- 35 8 51 9 74
Cr Cordova and Webster silty clay loam: 4 50 1
DrA Dakota and Basset sandy loans, 0 to 2 percent slopes--- 15 IIIs-1 39
DrB Dakota and Basset sandy loans, 2 to 6 percent slopes--- 15 IIIe-14 38 _ 4 50 1
EsA Estherville sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 16 IIIs-2 40 4 50 1
EBB Estherville sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 16 IIIs-5 38 4 50 1 53
EsB2 Estherville sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded-- 16 IIIe-5 38 4 50 1
EBC Estherville sandy loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes 16 IVe-3 41 4 50 2
EsC2 Estherville sandy loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes, 16 IVe-3 41 4 50 2 72
eroded
EaD Estherville sandy loam, 12 to 18 percent slopes 16 VIe-2 42 5 50 3
EsE Estherville sandy loam, 18 to 25 percent slopes 16 VIIe-2 43 5 50 3
FaA Fairhaven silt loam, sand substratum, 0 to 2 percent 18 ZIa-1 36 . 1 48 1 53
slopes
FaB Fairhaven silt loam, sand substratum, 2 to 6 percent 18 IIe-4 35 1 4$ 1 0
slopes
F*C2 Fairhaven silt loam, sand substratum, 6 to 12 percent 18 IIIe-3 37 2 50 2
slopes, eroded
FhA Fairhaven silt loam, deep variant, 0 to 3 percent
sncpe 17 =-1 34 1 48 1
' Ge Glencoe silty clay loam 19 IIIw-1 39 9 51 10 4\
HaB Hayden loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 20 IIe-3 34 1 48 4 72
HaB2 Hayden loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes,- eroded 20 IIe-3 34 1 48 4 2
H&C Hayden loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes 20 IIIs-2 36 2 50 5 �3
HaC2 Hayden loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded 20 IIIe-2 36 2 50 5 3
HaD Hayden loam, 12 to 18 percent slopes 20 - IVe-1 40 2 50 6 73
IiiD2 Hayden loam, 12 to 18 percent slopes, eroded 21 IVe-1 40 2 50 6 3
2 aE2 Hayden loam, 18 to 25 percent slopes, eroded 21 VIe-1 42 3 50 7 3
flab' Hayden loam, 25 to 40 percent slopes 21 VIIe-1 43 3 50 7 3
HcC3 Hayden clay loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes, severely
eroded 20 IVe-1 40 2 50 5 m73
fcD3 Hayden clay loam, 12 to 18 percent slopes, severely VYe-1 42 2 50 6
" eroded lin
1..
0
t
•..,.... r-+ v vuri t.1:-,..-'4425102
P. 04
IL
sou. Bliiivr.:1
Iis available to plants within a depth of b feet. The Rnset Capability unit i'le•-I
soils rt...tain moisture somewhat better than tale other soils
in this unit.Generally the hazard of wind erosion is severe.
17,i� unit r•un�ta- of E•I•c,c)rrl altrl .c`lt'ro11' t•rc„lt•c1 ,.r,ils
I These soils warm up of sass• 11avt
cultivate. of . w supply j early in spring and are easy to 1 tl r `rir,. 'tills' =„il'' : „
of moisture is dre•1,. "v" sit":1"r"l. lu,cl nlr� •, uc macs°, uHdl• ,trekl .
s and tire. adequate, they re- <i•nni t flLt , n rl n")i.�tte}t
P well to fertilization. They are well suited to winter $tOI textured. derinea.),,,t�' t.l,►ncic•l;tta, anti toe nwisl,ure-
grarn, short.-season crops.and melons. They are not suited
storage capacity i, moderately high.
I to corn and soybeans. If irrigated and otherwise well nr4-'clt•rat • Tl►e. urrllnir•rl,tlttere t•uu1.enrilis ne.tlinit`, io i•er.y
managed,they are suited to truck crops, Icrty. liluu,fa' i� rul,id, slue] t ht� t`r u�icn, lulztu cl is SIC>>ul e.
Droughtiness and wind erosion are serious limitations.
These soils are .lined to hay ,•rips am, pasture Grasses,
A cropping, system. Lit t1►e■ are
Spring 3''' nit tha-t provides year-round eover 1S rlo snitch to (1116.v:tied r•11)1) .
' heeded. Spring plowing, minimum tilla crop residue t ) t*enhI(•1) an
needed.
wind stri spier �� pp lntve ti ant• r url,(,n:►tc` 1%•lilrnl .1 depth of:3t; ini•ltis and
P . 'pping, stubble.control and l••rtl:crlutntlj' t1rt, well ratite t:► k`IO 1te:.,, such as t►lf.tlfa.
slrrlterbelts of pine are im.po tans, for control or 'wind 11'ur,rh,l or p;1-t ut•ed areas should not be.el r•ed. and I;relts
erosion. `With wind striperopping, the nearly level soils
now r• l' ]
can be cropped in a 6-year ultirin.ed1 silnuetl he e.sla is rtcl ill permanent vege-
1 rotation that includes: 1 or 2 tatac)n. !'1rr�riir, if IiPC•(h`tl. should l,F t10Ue. in Sj)r•in".• GILL
years of grass-legume meadow.Contour strips are effective lies "'VI tr, `►c• ,1,c11,�r1 and ,hen r,rc•c1t'r] to bra« {h;., 2n),
in the more sloping area. The.alternate strips of meadow Some 'lave r, oe st:l hoz.N. with en`r'
help to control runoff. Generally terraces are not used.
before Arras:, ran 1►t• t`�ral,Ji,�lrecl. 1,u�el ulg strum ores
I
Waterways should be established and maintained
wherever needed.
These soils generally requite large. amounts °''� {: ,'1- 't:o;•rt,:, :: .�•, • r..:r.,.. .11*- -A.
and These soils amounts require of phosphate. ou s of rmtash k ' .A.,,.,•i;•.-41., 5S.4 - '• w�C}-• '�.-SC•�'.
g y tit �'n .r-
All are lore in •w. x.� :. .. '`!t ;:.:-...,_i �c .4„
I organic-matter content. Heavy applications - ,�•
and rotations that lications of manure �r 4,y.p.,, , -•r„�. ..-�
beneficial.
include grasses and legumes are s '1"
These soils make poor permanent pasture because it is i_' `
difficult to maintain a good sod Pasturing the second year g. -k..7'r; ` - ' "• .}' • .
I m the rotation is better •• "� �r'4 � :'� :' = � • '
r than ��"
permanent , tie m.aurttain -'�c; 3 •� .:.•. ;,;
pro( drought pasture, Pasture of alfalfa and brorne�'r•ass y ;.7`itel . t ;S '�';'{'r j, 74''.?'�,: -_�•v= :
more drou c t resrsta tit and produce; more forage +,''r ' K `# �` ' � �C • t"'
I more dr pasture. There are tracts of ore fo d�br than — --' �•1 i-� ,,,(
blue -ass on the R h Set y ' 4, . ,,., >~;: - .
soils. If pasture is needed, it .: �^ *, `.-'--...----s,-,7. -�t
would be. ndt•is. hle to clear these tracts and use them for :''711C7:'=--1:44;"t - =J4 � ', '-,-. ...
'''' _t--
rota'tion crops and pasture. 4.;----7,---: -- ,
Odd averts winter . .`A. - r
I where corer is lacking can be J � " ' -3 ` 4. -7 ` _ r r:
g
developed for wildlife. The plantings should include f •r `"Q . ::>,.
drought-resist ,' `'� t=_ �. ',-;. .!�._� -
>_ � ant conifers, shrubs, ler*umeS, and grasses, - • " �
In areas where winter cover is adequate, corn or =all
~._ '
tipare ie,_1 p sully in Hayden loam, 18 to 25 percent slopes,
I grain should be left. after harvest. or should be planted
to provide food for pheasants. eroded.
A11 of these soils are well suited to conifers. 1':t.l tire of a fa 1 Ca and liretilegrass
Capability unit T'w-I
than l,lur�.r,1�, ,;t,i►uY•. j►r utitrr•t��more frrl stl;e
I 1 Grsl4in•• nlusr. l .
tali%t1ljt,11 11'Illr rnan►t)Y' Foul 1►1u;;hluttrr c,r tual ttlmcmmer-
is unit consists of Peat and muck, moderately >;hal-
lor-, over sand. The sand is within a depth of 42` >1c111i.,1,)e s tar►, ,,'ir E,'it F r,,r. '
Natural fertility is lot(.Frost is a hazard- Fire is a see io y rt rr. l,l,,,;111,:1tc;. ur)rl ]►of<t41t i?
ntc•:ttlr,u- 11► i:'• 11111)3(31't•rl is, nebe)(Ali l 'ast11r't's ant_ ]171:
hazard because it exposes the generally sterile underlying 1')W o1 1 sot? :4)(111111 lrr t1}-.I:E�rI ur !Ng u ► :
I sand. u,<1 re5c�c•rlirl;i.
These soils are .the serf •$ t r } 1111(1 t)►,r, heft 1,,,
e too wet to be suitable for crops, Most t„ l,r ,lo.,.. the HI-oils u Iii id1t t.,•r►.;ic►u nnt)1 the
areas are in wild hay or pasture brlina a anti .uitttli,lt+r�•'',s1�•r�,311 •• •
areas
impractical. Shallow surface ditches can be used,generally F l n c'",uic1)1;.;1r t•,+, Ti'n)c l 1145• rt`c•clt•tl i u t1:
I is not s or i►;l•d •rr gr •. Tau` r,F1t• r•;u1 ln'clil,lu
suitable. Pastures can be im { turt•rt liv },art k 11•'11 fur grain.
worked thoroughly during a dry if the soils are j .l51F, of I iro.t. ,oil.r•:tr1 l,c•tai III'Iru►,l,d`,t fur w1•ilcllife. l'1,Int-
tilized and g 3 period and t'llen fey- ink �•huniti iu' l' I. .
11.1,}It•
d seeded with reed eanar�yi�zrz• s, j;lien well it..d•eclttr•. l►n.-}: ,-alil•t, 1.F:uric•. rw1 Line., while Dine.
established,this grass fotr,ns a tough, dense sod that sup- nnu• .tulr .r•• , hunt r�ur•lch•, ails,(, r to trtnt:ll, le-
established,ports light haying equipment and grazing cattle el-
when g Ti" a n1~l,c. 1►lautrtl to ' r
the soils are wet. Cana p. ra• rn)ir)•urt• Iii• c"ling �turll;1.••1
rig 1S t11oPe palatable as or tr►ta►111'i 11 1t► av,!►111%t1►rl The IH q•;;l.n�
ay than wild marsh grass. its quality and•pala•tabilit
can be improved if it is ton dressed with fertilize`, - titre Ft11(1 Anal i 1•,t11v1 (.11„1,.4• that tll't Ur,u•iJl j,;r'•
I. Must areas provide good corer for wildlife. In ninny Capability unit t'k-2
areas shallow pits can be con
., m=ater for waterfowl, constructed to provide open 1 Tlri'i unit t• Esii. Of 1',n191K1•i11r•-1ln ill sandy )q:►tl
. These soils are too wet to be suite and soils u f Illy 1;,1 ht•1 vi l)c`Si ur
blefortree , 1 Tiul►1rlrrl tit•rit•x.'1'1►t•st•1u:1�
Gips ir,utivrntt`I} 'past•}► and >,vu„•u),aI t`ary• i�-,) drerintwl.
L :.i •
41,
f1 i
. .
AUG— 9—oca Tui, . • _—_ -
AUG- 5-90 THU 11 :55 C'VP CITY SOIL AND H2O CON 61244251e2 P. 05 _
,� ' ,�. ,
,r. .
CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA 4 •
i yls-1
XI 11
'Ow Burn+ville-Hayden sandy looms contain large stones Capability unit
ul bouldiws and are shallow to deep over Fand an gravel, This unit consists of soils of the Hubbard and Rasset - :`'••:;:
The rest of the soils are underlain by sand or gravel or • series.These are loamy sands that are moderately sloping ;,. _ .
both.
within a depth of 24 inches. All are droughty. The, and excessively drained. The moisture-storage capacity Is S •.
.'
�c,i;Cure-storage capacity is ion',and permeability'is mod- low to very low.The Rasset.soils retain moisture somewhat ,x; ti
�rlte(� rapid, ls?tur21 fertility is moderate to low. The better than the Hubbard soils. Permeability is rapid.
,,,,� hazard is severe. In cultivated areas where the Nateral fertility is low to very low.The erosion hazard is :'
pN� severe.
truUent is 1�to 18 percent,erosion has removed one-third
to two-thirds of the original surface layer.Generally these These Foils are too droughty and too erodible to be suit-
eroded soils are very low in organic-matter content. able for cultivated drops.The areas now cultivated should
These soils are suitable for hay crops and pasture grasses, be in permanent vegetation. I
bid they are ton droughty and too erodible to be used for These soils are suitable for hay crops and pasture grasses.
suitirated crops. The areas now cultivated should be in :maintaining the sod in pasture or hay meadow is most im-
pe1. n rent vegetation. porttant.Pasture of alfalfa and bromegrass is more drought
Slaintaining the sod in pasture or meadow is most im- resistant and produces more forage tItnn native bluegrass I
ta
versant- Pasture of alfalfa and bromegrass is more pasture. Normally, bluegrass makes little growth in mid-
d:lstught resistant and produces more forage than bluegrass summer. Gullies should be shaped and then seeded to
ste
pre. \ormnlIy, bluegrass makes little. growth in mid- grass. Some have to be stabilized with engineering sG2'llc- I
simnel.Gullies need to be shaped and then seeded to grass, trees before grass can be established.
some have to be stabilized by engineering structures before Plantings to provide shelter for wildlife should include
grass can be established. white pine,red pine,redcedar,Russian-olive,honeysuckle,
White pine, red pine. redcednr, Russinn-clive, honer• lilac,caraga ta,legume,,and grasses,
snekle, lilac, c-•lrtgnna, legumes, and grasses are suitable Trees can be _planted to improve existing woodland or I
for planting to provide.shelter for wildlife. to convert.to woodland the acreages that are now in mild-
Trees can be planted to improve the.existing woodland v,1ted ctrl s and ,Lasture.
or to convert to woodland the acreages that. are now in Ca ability unit Yll64 I
pasture or in cultivated crops.
Capability unit 171w-1 This unl consists of soils of the Hayden series. These
soils are steep to very steep,deep,well drained,and medium
The unit consists of Alluvial land, frequently flooded, textured to moderately fire textured. Permeability is
and a soil of the Coinfrey series. Both are on flood plains, moderate. The moisture-storage capacity is moderately
are frequently flooded, and in most places are poorly high,Runoff is very rapid,and the erosion hazard is very
drained to very poorly drained, In old stream channels severeh
these soils are seasonally pondecl or very wet throughout These soils are not suitable for cultivated crops. Areas
the year. On the slightly elevated ridges and mounds be- now cultivated should be established in permanent vege- I
tween the channels, they are more sandy and are better Cation,and wooded or pastured areas should not be cleared.
drained. These soils can be used for hay crops and pasture.Main-
These soils are to wet and too frequently flooded to seining a good cover of vegetation is most important. Con- I
be suitable for cultivated crops. A row crop can be grown trol or grazing is essential. Gullies should be shaped and
occasionally on the drier soils. Draining the wet soils is then seeded to grass. Some have.to be stabilized with engi-
sot practical as long as the flood hazard exists, and pro- neerina structures before grass can be established.
tection against flooding is costa Plantings to provide food and shelter for wildlife should i
The better drained soils make good pasture if cleared include white spruce, red pine,white pine,redcedar, Ras-
_ Inca otherwise well managed.Pastures need to be renovated sign-olive, honeysuckle, lilac, caragttna, legumes, and
sad reseeded occasionally,particularly when infertile sedi- grasses.
meats bury the sod. They should be seeded to grasses and These soils are well suited to trees. I
legumes that tolerate wetness.Oats,if used as a companion
crop. should be clipped or pastured. Otherwise, the oats Capability unit Vlle-2
ale likely to lodge and to kill the new Seedlings. This unit consists of Rnrnsville-Hayden sandy kerns
Pastures in the poorly drained to very poorly drained and a soil of the Estherville series.These soils are moder- '
srens are difficult to renovate. They should be seeded to ately steep to steep and somewhat excessively drained.The
Iced canary grass or other water-tolerant species. Reed IIurnsrille-Hayden soils are cobbl and stony and are
' eana2 ass shpuld be seeded on frozen ground, either shallow to deep.The Estherville soil is underlain by sand
!t►fall or in spring. Pasture should not be grazed early and
The moist retstor geecapac 24 is inches.
ow and permeability in spring or after overflow because of the danger of tram- y I
phi the turf.Stabilizing streambazllz kee s streams from is moderately rapid-Natural fertility Is low. The erosion
g p hazard is very severe.
eutthig into cropland and pasture at sharp turns. These soils are too droughty and too severely eroded to I
Wildlife is abundant.The marsh hay,cattails, and vet be suitable for cultivated crops. They can be used for hay
'edges provide excellent cover and nesting. Plantings crops and pasture, but it is difficult to maintain a good
hoillcl include water-tolerant conifers,shrubs,hedges,and vegetative cover.
uses. If the soils are pastured,it is most important to prevent I
lfany of these areas on the flood plain are brushy,pas- overgrazing.In many areas there is only a sparse growth
tuned,and wooded. of vegetation.Pastures are difficult to renovate and reseed.
CI
O
Z
i ' Z
w
lac „ �,. V
I-
1 d _1,a i oa •:� •�•,
�� ' Q a
'® 9\i°
:0:00...to it ill•sot.o♦Iorei,. 2
77 •1 0, 1 ?j
/x .
6 MInImum-----% ,,;��� ••∎•-d
‘lie 6feed V•
Ife.$111
lb 4111,1b.
.4a•f.° • e(% 0 •ititielltriele..
..*:•:.0,41%.04•1•071.021101/0,94 �'�i,
Coarse Aggregate .. .••
I•oljo.'111174,110°. fee
GRAVEL CONSTRUCT ION NT
E RANC E
1 '
-- / , .4,1.44'il.
IMO.=1111111111111C-111111r11111r”"
1
I
APPLICATION FOR EARTH WORK PERMIT
This report is designed to answer the questions set forth in '
the Ordinance No. 128, Section 7-35:B. "An application for permit
shall contain: ".
1. OWNER: Bruce Jeurissen OPERATOR: Wangerin Inc.
1500 Pioneer Trail 8610 Harriet Ave.So.
Chaska, MN 55318 Bloomington,MN 55420
1
2. Legal description of the property is as follows. The North
West 1/4 of the North West 1/4 of Sec. 26, Twp. 116 N, Rng.
23 W. Chanhassen Twp.
3. A certified abstract is attached as attachment No. 1. '
4. A proposed Grading Plan is attached as attachment No. 2.
5. The purpose of the operation is to provide a more accessible ,
area for crop lands. The grading work will be done in
phases, see grading plan for locations. The restoration to
these areas will start as the work for the next phase be-
gins, and will be completed before the following phase will
begin. The excess material ,approximately 190,000 cubic
yards for all phases, will be a silty clay and will be
exported off site. The topsoil will be respread to provide
for a good crop base.
6. The estimated time to complete all the phases is 75 working '
days.
7. The hours of operation would be from mid August to mid
December, Monday through Saturday 7:00 am to 6:00 pm.
8. Trees are located on the drawings from a aerial survey. A
small brush row that was in the process of removal by owner
will be removed by contractor,but there are no trees within
the area of excavation.
9. The end use plan is covered in item No. 5, and item No. 13.
10. The plan of operation will be to load trucks with a track or
wheel type loader. There is no processing necessary.
11. The travel routes for the trucks will be Co. Rd. 14 to Co.
Rd. 1 to U.S. Highway 169. We will be using 'anywhere from 3
to 16 trucks.
12. Erosion control will be of silt fence type., see grading '
1
•
I
plan, attachment No. 2, for locations. All areas will be
seeded with MNDOT seed mix # 5, slopes of 3: 1 and greater
will be mulched and disc anchored. Areas restored after the
' growing season will be dormant seeded for spring growth.
Dust control will consist of watering hall routes if deemed
necessary.
13. The existing grades prior to excavation is as indicated on
attachment No. 3. The final grades are as indicated on
attachment No. 4. The topsoil stockpiles are shown on the
grading plan, attachment No. 2.
14. We will comply with all local , and applicable state and
11 national codes.
15. An environmental assessment worksheet was deemed not neces-
sary at meeting with City officials, owner , and contractor
in May, of 1990.
16. Wet lands are shown on the grading plan. No wet lands in the
disturbed areas.
17. This should provide everything discussed at the above men-
tioned meeting.
Bruce Jeurissen David Sime
' Land Owner General Manager
WANGEF:IN INC.
i
I
KOHLRUSCH SCOTT/CARVER ABSTRACT CO.
128 WEST THIRD AVENUE
P.O. BOX 355
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379
(612) 445-1050
i
1
1
According to the records in the Office of the County '
Recorder , Carver County, Minnesota the following is a list
of owners lying within 500 feet of the following described
property:
The Northwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 26,
Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota.
Bruce Jeurissen Frank Fox
1500 Pioneer Trail 27990 Smithtown Road
Chaska, MN 55318 Excelsior, MN 55331
Gayle and Lois Degler Gilbert P. Laurent
1630 Lyman Blvd. 1371 Pioneer Trail
Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chaska, MN 55318
Lowell W. Peterson 1
15900 Hwy. 169
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dated this 29th day of May, 1990 at 8 a.m.
ü, LiW4AJ-e-
Wade Kohlrusch, Licensed Abstracter
WK/bjl
Attachment # 1
' 1
1
Bruce Jeurissen Galey & L. Degler Lowell W. Peterson
1500 Pioneer Trail 1630 Lyman Boulevard 15900 Hwy. 169
Chaska, MN 55318 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Frank Fox
Gilbert P. Laurent
27990 Smithtown Road 1371 Pioneer Trail
IExcelsior, MN 55331 Chaska, MN 55318
•
I
I
i
. _km, /
...... ,,0„,„„,,.,„/„.... 1
1 ; ./i / I.,;;;;;• ----,:::::....-,5,,,,/,,,,v4,7,,,,,,,,,,,,,/,,, ...., ....... ,,,,IA.7..........---
/ i 1 I 111 /��-=-=,"/r!rr/!,/1,/// i / / / , /' ._-.—� //',//iii!/,/�i//// ",
--- —I / /1111111 /.;/47/y/,// , ,/ / / , ' i �� //, /////////�////�/i//,
—�/// 11 it .r,,,,Ml/ / / / l / I e*".... / / ////l//l/// ////�// /i
1/// 1111411 ///'i'i i/�////,/// / / / I / ,' j ��� / //� /////l////%%��/// i/"
/ I1111 1 / /' //,/ / / / / / / ,/,',/,',////1/4%/4,47,,/,'
w!.'. //VIII!,!!///4,,//j, , / \ I / / / / ////9///////////////////////.////111// /
-;- "/11/19/;;W///1 , , \ 1 , ` ,1 I ///'/ \ „ ,
."-- 4,/, • • • • / • c:: , i , , ,• _ \ \ 1,•;,••••••••,;,• ,,,,,,,,••• ,'
_����-/;,• /;;/,,,,ll 1 , \ \ 1 ( , / / / \ 1 \ , / /, ;/// I,/,/lI//;I, . ',/
;// /,NI III/ f 1 .. I ' I 1 1 / l / / /`\ / / ///l I l
'.--.---"":"."// //rl1 /l 1 \ \ 1 I , 1 I I / / / \ ' \\--'; / / 1 // ! Il/rlrf I 'I
rill // 1\ \ \ 1 I / 1 / /f' i ' 'I / / / l 1 1/II 1/,17ti , , / ., 7 1 1 7 / 1 1 nrlllf rul I l i ,\ . \ / , i 1 1 1 1 / �. 1 / I / I l 1 111 1 1111 1111 1 1 1 t l
/ t , / I I I it I ►I , I
/ \\\ . , r l r 7 I t l+ll r
\ \ �`\:�� � —.`\\ \ ♦ \ 1 1 / 1 / / % i j 1 1111 1111 1111 1111 11 1 I , / /
- ..` .\ \\ .. \\\\ ♦\\\ l 1 I I ( / / 1 1 1 1 11 111 111 I I 1 7
1 1 ! . �� �..':\� \ \ 1 / / 11 11%; I 1 1111 III I I ,
1 / �.- . �:∎•:�,: ..\\ \\ \ \\\ \ I I 1 1 / / / ��/ / 1 1 11 111 11II III1 1 11 11/ /
1 —.�.�`Z::•: .�::�.s.. \\\`\\ \;\\\ 1 1 \ i / / 7 11 ' 11 1111 1111 1-III 1 1 1 1 1 1 /I /
—� •\.\♦\\\ \‘‘'\ \ \ / ....././ / I 11 1111 1111 1111 1 I I 1 I l/
/ ``���.\\\ \ \\\ \\ \ \\ \`—�� M� / / 111 1111 ,III I I I I I I i I ;ill/ f
\ / W"::� -�::. \a\\\\ a \\\\ / / I 111 ffr i 1111 1 l /
\ \ . i Ill i f l
1 \. \ \ 1 /'----"-Z-1-:-:::..::-:: ::',, ,,,� ....\♦.\\♦\\\\\♦♦ \ \\ . � / � 1 � 1 11 1111!111 I 1 11 111/1
1 1 1 /
I
! '� . .\\ \\\\ ♦♦ ♦♦ \\\ I / / 1 ll. 1 111 1111\\\\\ I r'-- �\\ \\ . \ — I ///1
I 1 // 11111, �IIII/1! �• ♦\a. \ . . ♦�\ \♦ \ -- f / / 111 1 Ii Ii!! l 1 r 1
\ ♦\ ♦ ♦\ \\•\ \ •i” / / I !!17111! Pt/'l/I 1 1
\Z �� \\ .-. \ \\\\\\ \�\\\\ \ I ! ei1 I Ill �I l l ! 1
� ♦\\ / \ `�\� \\` \♦\\ \\\\\\ ♦ \\\�. I / / /1/4///' Ifl, l,/,/1111 �l ! 1
-.',:`,,‘,\ ♦\♦\\\\\\ i -` \ \\`\\\\\N\\\\\\
1 jjl I:i i \> 1�+ \ 1 1 j /J / ,1/11111/NII � Il// I I \
♦
\. \\\ \ \ \ ` \\\11 /i% %.ii/ �1�-�,1 I / L+ //% ///11/ llll lrf/ 11 1�\..1 1 1 / ( / / I, 1 81 t 1 1 1 1 \
\ \:\\aaa 1 1 11. ',L„b ' . 1 / / / /�//!1 Ill 1 1 \ \
�\ \\\\aaa l l I /i 4i�i' - %���. � / / / / / !I 1! I 1 \
\\\aaa { tu•"/ i / t / ///46"//11,1 I ll! lI l l 1 1 1 1 \ \ •
_—�`�. \aa\a.. \ \ t ,,,://', ,r/ A';0.--;1-7:--7-='-z-:::i'� 1 I t l / 1 // /llI 11 1 1 1 1 \\ \ \ `\
.\`\\\ , \aa\\\\i \ '_—��'/,ire.4'4 i 7 1 r /1� 1 /1% /I I 1 \\ i\ \\ ' \
---- . \\` a aa\\♦ 4 — _y` ..V N i � — .�— / • i 1 /1/// ,/,',',/ It,'1 \\ \ \ \
\ ♦\\\a�\\a\\♦\b .'\f/s;'.y r /�i i/4/i — l 1 I 1 /1/l \\ \\.\\.„‘ \ \ a
�\ ♦ ♦♦ a�\\\aa\\ `�—__—.5' +1,i/ /� i/G/i/.j� / / \ \
` \ \\ � ����— —ice~ s.�g� /•/i%��fi�' / \ \ t 111 / 11/I 1 \\ \ \ \
\\ \ . \� 1 1 1 I 111 1 \‘`,,k,\.\`' \ \
I
♦ ` \aaa.._ - / /////,/�////.' I I 1 \1\\ \ \ \
t \\\`\\\• _ � -yy i�/,'��i��j� /iii �. \ ., , / I 1\ \\�"\ `\‘‘‘\\‘\\ ``\\ \\
\ ♦ a /i,i ,i/ice//,i/%iii.'- \ \ \,•,‘,,,,:'......./i / ! \\\ \\\•\\ \ \ \\\ \s./1 .-' / /.//,,/////,,11 I1 1 1_\\ -- s--- —' \ \\ \\ \\ \�\\\\ \\\\; \.
// //i//I/l// 1\ 1 \ • \ \\
l \ —�— /,, ,/,i i l I I!1 I\`\ . 14f1.,‘, .\ \ \ `\ ,‘\, \.„,,,„•„•;:...--177\
/ /// 1 A\ 1 \ \ 1. . \ \ S. \ \ \\\. . _
1 ``— --�i��i i i 1 I \\\ \\ •. \ \. `--�..\`\ \`�.``
/ \ — -- __
/ L_ ///',----: ,/- \ \■,‘Allti ' ,--. .,,\ 4,-- ) \ -
111j 1 4. ��• j///fi' - - • S■
14' \• \\\\_." ...----'s,,,,,,:‘ ,267,Z:,::-..,..--:.::•.::: .■.:.:N.:.: :‘'\\...,////:///// ii:/'..-----------------------------• --
1 1 \ \ \ \ 1i / / 1 / / 1 i■`\\\ `\\ \�\\\ 1 i 1 ,/ >- .- / / / 1 ' \\ \`\ `\ I
\ \ \ a ‘N.1% 1\ I / / 1
y
• w
v
, .
�,� ��
, :.__z---)■ --- .. ,„4
n : 1
I�a
aa
r �1s-
eVr, :c�`+ NW alE
4'1 . 1
■
I _
tt‘ : •• 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS a
=N. .
M � 4
0:. i i/ .. //,•i-- iii///1l1/j/U�i//�/iirr/` '•- ► -------- ,
f� �' ' 1 II// iif..--- „,,,vvvy�'//,,� .,/, / i -_/ _- - - %%0'151/iii /,/,/ �
-� / 11!I 1 /' ` i �l/� 4 i/ i / / i .� // !;a uyyv.•, '/.
F _ III I11 r'i"�i i�////, ! / / / / 7/„, 5i,
1 ///111 I /,r , / .1 \ 1 /111/11,
_'ii%ice '• ,�, / / / / f 1 / \ \ \ // i � i', /1
...:-.....5-,
., 1 i 1 11 / i /� I r
-----��. ,.if /,rl l!/ 1 \ 1 1 11 i l ! i \\ / / /•r fill
/ 1 /1 /� 1 I I / / ! / 1.\\\ 1 \\ i ::::\ ; / f rl 1 I /,!` \ \ 1 1 i 1 %\ \ \ \ : I T\'... ‘), \\\ 1 \ k%.___-- , /, .-- .,,' ' 1111 ill /Ili/ , /
`\ \` t(141: k \'`,. \ .\ \\ \ '1 \\\\\\ \ i , 111 I11I
\\ \ ' Q2-'W \‘
\ \\ '\■ N\\\ ........'''.'
` 1 I /I lit I il R,
\� \\‘‘‘' ♦ ♦ \\ \`\ \\\\ \ \\ \ / / // 11 I r ' I if I
\\ \\\ / ,..� ♦ \ ` !' op,'y .Hr \‘‘‘‘
I\`, t I / i / // l I/1 (II
{��1 (1 a l‘
...--..---_- - s&-:',,- . pu-i- -3,., . v =— `/C' ►,y1 , '4%—_=—_-- — — 1` , �if / ,, 1, 1 ill I \A, . ,
\ \ / / r,/�,i, ii 'I \ II ,1 ill \ \ 1 i '1 I1. i -\\
\ / /� vii i r/i \ \\ / //1 ! ;\\ \\ 1 i i \V\ t�r �.L_-. .:r /�i ii%iii/iii0- • • \ \\\ `i I�I \\\ \\ �\1114 . , \\..... _.:.-
, r ,- . , ,,:-..„,,,,.., , „ , \,,,„,, ,,,,„\ ,,, , \ __
s NbAkAk,s:..- :„..--_:--_-__--_---2 ::::----;:;-
...‘ ,,,,,,,,,„,.. „ \ \
, ,,, , ... , , %
I
1 III( / \`� �� \\♦ \\\\ ♦\ �� te, %,_ _ ,...-____ __
iNppoPt■- -, ".--. "''•, '',. - --.".\ -‘‘\ •‘ • ) -•- , ,,, / , ,,•• ,..
I.
•
Ir t
1
II11 I .
1
O v
1 �► � a ti ll'S N li� SAD GRADING PLAN
. ..p, • P a'\� PROPOSED
U. 4
I I .
I
- 70) // ,'''''/'/ .'' , 7.,- I
I
0/K
I ♦f [ f € f
1
. . ,
k, ,, 7 / :(( , .
vi\
- 1
, c, „:„. ......) . . , q
Ill
7) - -;91,1,/ 1
1z/7 / *t.44 . i :$7.1 ' \
7/ *‘ , ''
‘____... i
_ ..4, - --
(,-,_
..
. 1
1
, t ,. -
. . , , ..
. • I.
I
I
. 1
s -- 4 :-. 1
r 6N IVOri o: FINAL GRADING PLAN
J__ : e
` $ i
•
ICAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .R Aug 9 ,90 8 :27 No .001 P .02
CAivMPBF1_I_, -KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, PA.
Attorneys at Law
' Thomas J. cs110)011
Roger N. }:nutxofl
(612)456.9539
Thomas.M. Scott
Gary G. flicks Fax(612)456.9542
James R. \X/�l.t��n
h Knersch
Gregory D. Lea's
Dennis J. Unger August 9, 1990
VIA FACSIMILE TRAN:MISSION
Mr. Paul Krauss
Planning Director
' City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive, Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re: Bruce Jurissen - Mining Permit
Dear Paul :
You asked me to review the Jurissen mining permit that was
originally issued on Avast-- 9-0 to determine if the City
-, acted improperly. The Permit was issued for excavation of 21,481
cubic yards of material for "installation of culvert across Bluff
Creek" . The Permit was improperly issued without City Council
approval . As I understand the facts, more than 21, 481 cubic yards
' of material was excavated. I do not know of any legal theory
under which Jurissen can successfully sue because City staff did
not administratively issue a permit for additional excavation.
' Staff had no authority to •extend or enlarge the scope of a permit
that should never had been issued.
' V- yours,
CAM BELL, • UTSON, SCOTT
' &
• - S, P.A.
B . ---- �iragrAZ
' • • -er N. Knutson
RNK:rlt
I
IYankee Square Office HI • Suite 202 • 3460 Washington Drive • Eagan, MN 55122
( l;
AYRCOI
7tY \,'' CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ir-d l
(612)448.1213 _ 600 EAST 4TH STREET
CHASKA,MINNESOTA 55318
�I N S0
COUNTY OF CAI VEI
RECEIVE
AUG 0 6 1990
August 3 , 1990 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1
TO: JoAnn Olsen, Chanhassen Senior Planner '
FROM: Roger Gustafson, County Engineer
SUBJECT: Chanhassen 90-1 Interim Use Permit
In response to your memorandum dated July 30, 1990, regarding
100,000 cubic yards of material to be excavated from the Bruce
Jeurissen property, the following comments are made: 1
1 . It is understood that the updated quantity of material to be
excavated is 200,000 cubic yards.
2 . The haul route in Carver County is proposed to be CSAH 14
(Pioneer Trail) . Hauling of this magnitude is not
incorporated into the typical computations for the 20 year '
design life of a roadway. The premature consumption of the
county's investment in CSAH 14 is of concern. Using the
recent upgrading of CSAH 14 east of TH 101 as an example, the
magnitude of road consumption is described by the following
computation.
ROAD CONSUMPTION COMPUTATION '
Road: CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
Segment: TH 101 to East County Line
Cost: $350,249.46 (Grading & Paving - 1989)
Design: £N18 of 289,575 (20 Years - One Lane)
Assumption: 200,000 Cubic Yards
20 Cubic Yard Loads (5-Axle Combination Trucks)
Loaded Truck EN18 Factor = 2.37
Empty Truck EN18 Factor = 0.30 i
1
Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer
I .
I
Computation:
- Truck £N18 (200,000 C.Y. 's)
200.000 C.Y. 's I Loaded Trip 1 2.37 ( e1,118 Factor) +
' 20 C.Y. 's Loaded Trip
10,000 Empty Trips 0. 30 ( EN18 Factor) = 26,700 N18 ' s
Empty Trip
- Road Consumption Percentage
' 26 .700 F N18's (Haul Impact)
579,150 £N18's (Design Loadings) x 100 = 4. 61$
' - County Investment Consumption
$350,249.46 (Construction Cost) x 4.61% = $16,14.6._ 0
3 . The above computation represents approximately 1/2 the length
of CSAH 14 proposed to be used as a haul route.
4. Based on the road consumption that will result from this
project, it is recommended that the city and county mutually
consider the inclusion of a road impact fee payable to Carver
' County as a stipulation of the earth work permit. Legal
review of this recommendation would have to occur before
formal consideration by the city council.
5. Further, a bond in an amount to be specified for damages to
the road that are unforeseen and beyond the limit of the road
impact fee is recommended as another stipulation of the
permit.
6. Applying the previous computation approach to the entire
' county highway segment would result in a haul route impact fee
of approximately $0.20 per cubic yard of material hauled on
CSAH 14.
' After you have reviewed this memorandum and discussed it with other
city staff, please contact me for the purpose of explaining the
next steps to be taken in considering a haul route impact fee for
' this project.
cc: Dick Stolz, County Adminsitrator
Paul Krauss, Chanhassen City Planner
1
10,001 to lG(,UU . cubic yards— . ,;,e first 10,000 cubic yards, plus$15.00 for
each additional 10,000 yards or fraction thereof. ,
100,001 to 200,000 cubic yards—$165.00 for the first 100,000 cubic yards,plus'$9.00 for
each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof.
• 200,001 cubic yards or more—$255.00 for the first 200,000 cubic yards,plus$4.50 for each
additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof.
Other Fees: . .
Additional plan review required by changes,additions •
or revisions to approved plans $30.00 per hour*
. a (minimum charge—one-half hour)
*Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction,whichever is the greatest.This cost shall include
•
Y J g
W surnrvision, overhead., equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of the employees
involved.
; 16 .
. . .
. . . ,
■ . : ,
. , .
• m TABLE NO.70-B—GRADING PERMIT FEES' • ""
: rn 50 cubic yards or less i $15.00
51 to 100 cubic yards 22.50
CO 101 to 1000 cubic yards—$22.50 for the fitst 100 cubic yards plus$10.50 for each additional
0 100 cubic yards or fraction thereof. ,
-,I 1001 to 10,000 cubic yards—$117.00 fos the first 1,000 cubic yards, plus$9.00 for each
additional 1,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof.
rn 10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards—$198.00 for the first 10,000 cubic yards,plus$40.50 for
;0 each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. , , •• , ,
•C 100,001 cubic yards,or more--$562.50.for the first 100,000 cubic yards,plus$22.50 for
each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof.
Other Inspections and Fees:
M1. Inspections outside of normal business hours $30.00 per hour2
(minimum charge—two hours)
• 2. Reinspection fees assessed under provisions of
Section 305(g) $30.00 per hour2
3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated $30.00 per hour2
(minimum charge—one-half hour) '
• IThe fee for a grading Yrrmit authorizing additional work to that under a valid permit shall be t
i the
difference between the fee paid for the original permit and the fee shown for the entire project.
20r the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction,whichever is the greatest.This cost shall include supervision,
overhead,equipment,hourly wages and fringe benefits of the employees involved.
875
MI BM ON MO NM — MO OM — MI N MI MI • I • i M MI
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
A
i
MEMORANDUM
TO: Paul Krauss , Director of Planning
FROM: Scott Harr , Acting Public Safety Director '
DATE: August 10 , 1990
SUB.] : Interim Use Permit to Excavate 190 , 000 Yards of Material
from the Jeurissen Farm
This memo is to respond to your request for input from the Public
Safety Department regarding the above permit application.
' Because of several large scale projects that have occurred during
the recent past , I welcome this opportunity to express the con-
cerns that have been raised by the community regarding truck
traffic in Chanhassen.
The majority of complaints revolve around overweight trucks ;
speeding trucks ; and the noise emitted from these trucks . In
requesting assistance from the Carver County Sheriff ' s Department
and the Minnesota State Patrol , weight and speed violation
complaints have been substantiated . The noise from these trucks ,
particularly as they shift up and down-shift along the roadways
has been a major source of aggravation for citizens .
' Based on the complaints that we have been fielding during other
projects , I would encourage the City to consider setting strict
limitations on the hours of operation, and making it clear that
weight and speed restrictions are to be strictly complied with.
I While we can request patrol activity from the State Patrol and
the Sheriff ' s Department for this area, the size of this project
may warrant the hiring of additional Troopers and Deputies to
work weight enforcement and traffic enforcement .
1
i
I
Planning Commission Meeting 1
August 15 , 1990 - Page 1
PUBLIC HEARING:
INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR A GRADING PROJECT TO EXCAVATE 100,000 CUBIC YARDS 011
MATERIAL AND LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 1500 PIONEER TRAIL. BRUCE JEURISSEN .
Public_Present:_
Name Address
John D. Rice 505 No . Hwy 169
Herb Bloomberg 7008 Dakota
Bruce Jeurissen 1500 Pioneer Trail , Chaska
Loren Hebbeger Wangerin Inc . '
Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item . Chairman Conrad
called the public hearing to order .
Loren Hebbeger : My name is Loren Hebbeger . I 'm a representative of
Wangerin Incorporated and I think the thing on this project , what we 're
trying to do is take a parcel of land and improve it to it 's highest and II
best use . Since we shut down on this project , which would be probably in
the later part of May or first part of May , we 've hauled a 120 ,000 yards
out of Chaska , Arbor Park . Leveled off an industrial site and they 're II starting to build on it already . What the purpose of this situation was
originally , and the group of investors that are involved in this situation
with Wangerin , are trying to take an agricultural site which is originally II designated for a 2 1/2 acre tract development situation from 1987 . Level
it off and put it to it 's highest and best use which it is zoned for
currently as a 2 1/2 acre tract for housing . The purpose of this situation
is to improve the land and still at the same time keep it as an
agricultural situation until the land is improved to a developable
situation which when this hauling is done it will still be an agricultural
situation that can be upgraded to a subdivision . So I guess what I 'm II looking at , I 'm in the development situation , I am looking at this parcel
as an improvement to the existing situation . The zoning is there for a 2
1/2 acre tract . Mr . Jeurissen who will be participating in the project
here is interested in upgrading the land and keeping it as an agricultural !'
situation until a development occurs . I don't feel that we 're going to
hurt anything here whatsoever and we 're going for 190,000 yards right now
•
but within 90 days we moved 120,000 yards which from a standpoint of
traffic problems . We went down Lyman Blvd . to TH 101 and went down.,
Pioneer Trail which is Hennepin County 1 . We didn't have any problem
whatsoever as far as the haul . I guess I appreciate the staff making
recommendation for approval and I guess what we're here for is to just movil
this thing along . We were hoping to put this• in an orderly fashion and
continue to haul here previous to this and get the job done . I appreciate
your people 's opinion . '
Conrad: Thanks . Other comments. Anything else? Is there a motion to
close the public hearing? 1
Emmings moved, Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing. All voted
in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
' Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 2
Conrad: Joan , we 'll start down with you .
' Ahrens: I had a hard time initially being objective about this application
given the apparent cavalier attitude of the applicant toward the City in
' the past and a total disregard toward the City 's instructions . But I did
get through it . I 'm not sure I understand it . I have no idea what 190 ,000
yards of material does to , removing that much does to a piece of property .
Maybe you can explain what this property 's going to look like . I mean is
it going to be flattened or what?
Krauss: Essentially yeah . I don 't know if that video would help explain
' that . We do have a movie of this narrated by our engineering staff but if
I could work off of this for a moment . Right now the existing Jeurissen
farmstead is over here with the house and the out buildings . The area that
' they were working last spring is in here . Now this is basically an . . .
Here 's Bluff Creek . That 's . . . The top of the hill is right here .
Basically you 're pretty much flattening this off to clean it out . There
would be a berm left with some trees on it there and one might be here but
' basically they 'll flattened it down with a slight grade down to the creek .
Now we have asked to make sure there 's a minimum cut level set there so
that no potential building sites get below the flooded elevation there . At
' least 3 feet above it which is what our ordinance requires . I 'd also like
to talk about the residential use on this property for a moment . This and
some other properties were conceptually reviewed as 2 1/2 acre lots prior
to 1987 . There were some time deadlines for them to submit preliminary and
final plats . Those time deadlines came and went and Council extended it
because of the delays in getting the final EIS for TH 212 done . TH 212
passes through so close over there and the platting has been conceptually
' looked at but it doesn 't work with TH 212 and that 's one of the concerns
that the Council has in working . . . It 's not entirely clear . . .as to whether
or not this grading is ideally suited for whatever is going to happen in
the future . There 's no plan backing it up . All we have is the original
concept and that doesn't fit with this entirely . Now what they 're doing
here , and this is going to be I suppose the more minor aspect of what
' they're doing . The other one , you 've got on this side , on the north end of
the property and it 's quite normal terrain through here and what they 're
going to do is basically knock it reasonably flat with a slight grade to it
even to a hill and then you have a steeper grade going up at the north end .
As we understand it from the Soil Conservation Service , that steep grade at
the extreme north end of this site is not going to be farmable and it's
based on their recommendation that we said that that should be established
in a ground cover that will keep it from eroding .
Ahrens: So , they 're going to be removing earth from that northern area but
' not to improve it for farming which is what the application said?
Krauss: Well , what they 're doing is those black boxes are areas where
they 're going to stockpile the topsoil . They 're going to pull the topsoil
' off , take out the clay soils they want , get the finish grade and then put
the topsoil back . So yes , it would be utilizable for farming .
Ahrens: But the grade will be such you can 't farm over it?
I
1
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 3
Krauss: No , what the grade on the bulk of the area will be lessened over
what , it 's quite rolling now and it 's not going to be in the future . So t
the extent that Mr . Jeurissen has a tough time working grades now , most of
the area he 's farming will be flat or reasonably flat . That steep grade
only going to occur at the north end of the property .
Ahrens: Is there an intent to move more earth in the future? Is this it? "
I know this is it for like this application but .
Loren Hebbeger : That 's it .
Ahrens: Or is everything going to just be flat after this?
Loren Hebbeger : It will be flat enough for development from a housing II situation . The elevations will work with a housing development plan and
then we 're out of here .
Ahrens: But it 's a nice rolling terrain right now right and you 're going II
to flattened it out?
Loren Hebbeger : It will still be rolling . It will be overlooking the
creek but at the same time what you 've got here is a high elevation . As all
matter of fact , his soil conservation situation talks about that . They
will not even give him a 1995 renewal on his soil situation because of the '
terrain. They don 't consider it farmable .
Ahrens: How long has this area been farmed?
Loren Hebbeger : His family has had it .
Bruce Jeurissen: It 's been farmed for a lot of years but the Soil
Conservation people have just established standards now. . .plans of soil
erosion and things like that by 1992 to let you be part of the farm program
in 1995. We have to have plans in the process by 1992 . '
Ahrens: But that 's not really relevant to what we 're talking about here is
it?
Bruce Jeurissen: Well it 's all connected. Yes it is.
Loren Hebbeger : What it is is a phasing process. Keep it agricultural
with an interim use and develop, it eventually within a period of probably Al
years .
Ahrens: So it sounds to me like the farming issue is not really an issue II
for you at all .
Bruce Jeurissen: There 's going to be more farmable acres after this is
done . . .
Ahrens: This is quite a comprehensive report you 've prepared here Paul . '
I 'm not going to go through everything even though I had questions as
I went through here on everything . I 'm sure everyone will be glad to hear
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 4
' that but . I just keep paging through this because it 's so , it 's
overwhelming to even understand what 's being proposed here . To me to think
that we have this area out there that 's nice and rolling hills and we 're
going to give somebody a permit to just bulldoze it over for whatever
reason , whether it 's to make money off the earth that 's being moved to the
Eden Prairie landfill or what the purpose is , it seems to me that , it 's
hard for me to believe that this is really an improvement for the City or
' that it 's going to give the City , that it 's any benefit for the City and
it 's a large area and to have 10 ,000 trucks , which seems amazing to me .
10 ,000 trucks in 90 days . You anticipate that you can finish in 90 days?
Loren Hebbeger : I 'm not trying to argue about the situation . We already
have moved probably 120 ,000 yards which is already done . There was no
' problem whatsoever . We were hauling at 7 : 00 in the morning until 5:00 in
the afternoon when rush hour 's on . Sometimes 8:00 to 5:00 and I guess the
thing on this project , we 're looking at developing the property and putting
it to it 's highest and best use . It 's a taxable situation for the
' community of Chanhassen . You don 't have to run utilities out there . It is
in a situation right now where it 's subdivided for 2 1/2 acre situation .
All we 're trying to do is improve it and develop it . We 're not going in
' there to cause a disruption . We 're just trying to work it in a phased
situation and get the job done .
Ahrens: I think I have a pretty clear idea of what your intent is .
' Loren Hebbeger : It 's in no way going to hurt the property because an
investor is not going to buy a piece of property that he can 't develop and
that 's what we 're doing . We 're putting it into a developable situation
with agricultural also included .
' Ahrens: Well at any rate , those are my feelings about this application .
I think that the conditions that you put in here Paul are pretty specific
and cover most of the items we should be concerned with except maybe under
number 4 where it says no activity will be permitted during the U .S . Open
Tournament . I think that this and the subsequent application we get , there
should be specific dates in there covering because I 'm sure there will be
time before the tournament and maybe afterwards where you 'll want to cease
' operation . Maybe a day . I have a problem with the amount of, well the
traffic that 's going to go on, in and out of that property . I have a
problem with a lot of the items in here . Why don 't we move on .
' Conrad: Jim , why don't you handle this .
Wildermuth: I think I understand what you 're trying to do here and
' regardless of what you 're doing with the clay , regardless of what you 're
doing with the topography , the fact that your ultimate goal is to develop
the property , I 'm reasonably assured that you aren 't going to do terrible
damage• to the topography of the area . 190 ,000 yards in the mining industry
is not very much . 190 ,000 yards going down a County highway is quite a
bit . I think Paul you 've done a very good job of putting conditions on
this request . I like all of the conditions and I think it reflects the
comprehensive grading permit and excavation permit that has been put in
place but I would recommend that we add two things . One is that we impose
1
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 5 1
the road consumption fee that was discussed in a letter to you . Secondly II
I would propose that we add a requirement for compensation for either a
Sheriff 's deputy or a highway patrolmen to monitor the haulage route .
Krauss: If I could explain . We got a memo from the County Engineer that II
you 're discussing Commissioner Wildermuth , that indicated that there 's a
quantifiable amount of damage that will occur to the road . It 's apparently'
an accepted engineering formula . I 've talked to people about it that the
lifespan of the road is diminished by having so many large , heavy weights
placed on it . I asked our City Attorney about the possibility of
establishing basically an impact fee on that . He indicated to me that it I
was not a course of action he would encourage us to pursue because State
enabling Legislation to back that up is not in place . So he was somewhat
relunctant to do that so we did not recommend approval of that . What we
did do though is we said we wanted a letter of credit . One of the things
that letter of credit 's going to be used for is to require the repair ,
maintenance and cleaning of road damage and debris and whatever it 's
directly attributable to these people . If they haul on a muddy day , they II
may have to sweep the thing 5 times during the day . We wanted to inspect
the road . Have our engineering department walk it with the County
engineering department to sort of document what 's out there now . It 's a nell
road . It 's in pretty good shape . To the extent that it becomes damaged
during hauling , we 're going to probably try to make the assumption that
they caused it and ask them to repair that .
Wildermuth: From a legal standpoint can you make that stick?
Krauss: Well yeah . See that 's a direct impact . That 's not taking money
so that in the year 2010 when the road needs to be replaced , instead of th
year 2015 , we have an account to draw on . The concept is different and
enabling legislation is different so we 've done the best I think we can
within the confines of the way State Statute reads now . Secondly , the
Uniform Building Code does allow us to assess back our costs to inspect
these things at a rate of $30.00 an hour . It 's quite explicit in that area
I certainly saw no reason at all that the City should ask the general tax
payers to support us being staff going out there and spending a lot of our
time to monitor this thing . They should have to pay that for same as a
builder has to pay for us to come out and inspect his property and we full
intend to do that . I 've talked to our Public Safety people and they have
indicated that we could make arrangements for special patrols from the
County Sheriff . Special weight checks . Whatever we felt we needed and well
could draw on this ability to subsidize that to defray some of their
expense as well . And that's basically what we felt we can do and that 's
what this recommendation does.
Wildermuth: Okay . That 's fine . Under 2 then , I guess I 'd just like to see'
a little rewording there to include either the services of a Sheriff 's
deputy or highway patrol . Where do you talk about inspecting for road
damage and requiring compensation? Which item? Okay , 1 .
Krauss: And 9 deals with the need to clean up debris .
I
11 Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 6
Wildermuth: Right . One of the other alternatives is to construct a
separate hauling road which I 'm sure would make the project absolutely
unfeasible after having driven out there .
Loren Hebbeger : Can I make a statement at this point?
Wildermuth: Yeah .
' Loren Hebbeger : Going back to the original conversation here . We 've
already hauled 120 ,000 yards out of Chaska and the sherrif 's department ,
I met with them . I met with the Chaska Police force . If we 're in weight
restrictions as far as weight load , there is no problem or impact on the
road whatsoever . The other aspect of the point , BFI has got a bonafide
scale that is registered with the State of Minnesota as far as a weigh
' situation and I welcome them to come in and weigh any truck that they want
on the BFI scale because all of these loads are being tallied . And I guess
the thing what I 'm saying here , you can create more problems but going
right back to the original point , we 've already hauled 120 ,000 yards down
Lyman Blvd . with the County and City of Chaska involved and we haven 't had
any problems . Now there was a speeding ticket issued which I don 't blame
the parties involved .
Wildermuth: The point is though that you 're not going to be there every
time they load a truck to monitor the weight .
Loren Hebbeger : I guess the thing is .
Wildermuth: You 're not going to watch every driver .
Loren Hebbeger : Any development situation , and I feel this area in Chaska
' and all areas . As a matter of fact , Mr . Wangerin did most of the work
along 494 for Naegele and you 're going to have hauling out and hauling in
to develop property . I mean it 's a definite situation but if you keep your
trucks within a load weight specification , and I mean here you 've got an
' opportunity that they could come in at any time and spot check trucks and
use a scale which was certified through the Highway Patrol . As a matter of
fact , the Highway Patrol did stop one of the trucks and took him into
' Chaska to Gedney which is not a certified scale and it was brought out as a
point at that time that you 're welcome to monitor as they come into the
dump at any time . I don 't think there 's any problem here if we just go
' about it the right way .
Wildermuth: But I just think from a City standpoint .
' Loren Hebbeger : I agree with your concern . Right .
Krauss: If I could add one thing . This evening I handed out a memo from
the Acting Director of Public Safety where I was aware of the fact that we
had received a number of complaints about truck traffic on these roads and
his memo indicates that yes we have . Now I mean it 's a public road . People
are entitled to use it but there is a concern over the impact that it has
on people that live and drive along it each day . There 's a concern for
traffic safety . The TH 101/Pioneer Trail intersection is notoriously bad .
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 7
This site is just downstream from that . I think that that operation from II
Chaska generally has been conducted in a safe manner . I 'm not aware of an
fatalities or anything like that but we have had complaints and we 're just
trying to cognizant of that .
Wildermuth: I agree .
Conrad: Anything else? Annette?
Ellson: I 'm trying to find good reason not to do it . I don 't like it . I
don 't think it 's consistent with what we have in our goals of our plan
which is to maximize the natural features of Chanhassen. Instead we 're
taking away hills which are a natural feature and things like that and
I know it also is not suppose to involve any kind of activities that will
be detrimental to any persons or property and I think it 's already been
proven that it has been because of excess of noise and traffic so I think
based on those two reasons I 'd like to say that I 'd want to deny it .
Emmings: I have a lot of the same feelings that Annette does. This isn 't 11
an improvement to the property in my mind but nevertheless , on the other
hand , I order black dirt into my property and it comes from someplace .
They use gravel and sand and dirt and all kinds of things and all kinds of 11
construction and it all comes from someplace so I guess there 's some kind
of a balance here . Somebody owns some land here and they want to sell off
some of the land and I think they have a right to do that and I think the
fact that we passed this ordinance underlines the fact that they do indeed
have a right to do that if they want to . They 're not creating a pit or a
hole or defacing something like the river bluff like we had with Moon
Valley and so on so I guess I feel overall that they probably have a right
to do this . I guess what bothers me more than anything else is the past
behavior of these applicants certainly doesn't engender any trust in me . 1�
don 't know how we 're going to know that they 're only taking about 190 ,000
yards . I don 't know how we 're going to know what they 're doing. I don 't
trust them to operate within weight limits . I don 't trust them to drive
the speed limit . I don 't trust them at all because they 've got a bad trac il
record here so I guess if we 're going to pass conditions , I want to make
damn sure that somebody 's out there policing them because they need to be
policed . But other than that I guess I support . What? '
Loren Hebbeger : That 's fine . Just go ahead.
Emmings: Thank you . I guess I 'd support the application . I
Conrad: Tim?
Erhart: In seeing the memo from Scott Harr , I kind of regret not
complaining myself now because I certainly had thought about it many times .
I feel strongly that the truck traffic on Lyman Blvd . , TH 101 and Pioneer
Trail route was I felt that it was somewhat dangerous because I drive that
route which will probably surprise everybody but that is probably the one
reason why I would support the proposal here in that , in addressing
everybody 's concerns about well this is isn 't helping Chanhassen at all butt
you know , if we don 't allow them to take it here , then they 're just go to
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 8
I
' Chaska and then they 'll just drive through all of Chanhassen using some of
the worse routes which is what they did . I felt that was real detrimental
to everybody as a whole that drives that clay all the way through
Chanhassen on those winding roads . When they removed this material out of
' here previously , again I thought I agree with Joan and Jim it sure doesn 't
seem right but you know when you consider the alternatives , it 's better
than that . So I guess I don 't have an overall problem with it . If there 's
a problem with it , it 's the fact that there 's a market in it . If somebody
wants this material and for a reason which really , and everybody 's trying
to address that . The fact is somebody 's going to buy it . They 're going to
get it from someplace . I think this place , this particular location is the
' least detrimental in the City of Chanhassen . Actually the best place is
over on the river one .
' Krauss: Moon Valley .
Erhart: Yeah , Moon Valley because they don 't touch Chanhassen but . The
question I have in my mind though is what does Eden Prairie , why doesn 't
Eden Prairie allow them to take clay from somplace closer? Do they have an
ordinance against it completely or what?
' Krauss: I really don 't know . Eden Prairie staff has never contacted us in
any way , shape or form about this and from what I see in the newspapers and
on TV , I don 't believe Eden Prairie staff is on speaking terms with the
' landfill at the moment anyway .
Erhart : Do you know why they 've not looked at Eden Prairie as a potential
tsite to get clay? Loren? Don 't they have hills?
Loren Hebbeger : I guess what the situation is , we have 3 other sites that
we ' ll be working on and I guess basically , this material meets certain
classifications . In the Eden Prairie area there just is not a clay that
would meet the specification so as a result we 're out in this area and
we 'll be in Carver County also . We 've got several other sites that we 're
' going to be working on to develop .
Krauss: Where will that go? What route?
' Loren Hebbeger : That will come down 212 probably . But I don 't feel
there 's going to be a problem here as far as moving the material . It will
be done in an orderly fashion . It will be done in a phased situation . As
' a matter of fact , this site would have already been done if we could have
extended our permits which the original permit goes back to 1987 which was
a phased situation . Well , we ended up in a problem here and I guess maybe
' a permit was issued the wrong way but I just can 't , I 'm not trying to argue
with the people here . They were made aware at the time that we were
hauling the people that we were dealing with , the engineer , that we were
' going to phase it .
Erhart: Okay , thanks . On the other hand I agree with Steve in that this
thing should be controlled as tight as we legally can . Again , that doesn 't
' leave us a lot to do because you get into an issue of road destruction and
the fact is , if they don 't take it here and they take it out of Chaska and
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 9
they drive through the roads and we have no control over that at all so I
think there 's minimally what we can do to compensate the road destruction .
I think you 've done that in your item 1 . If you can find , I guess what
you 're saying here is if you can find specific damage that would be
specifically attributed to this particular project , then we can go back an
charge them . I question whether $30 ,000 .00 is enough for a letter of
credit . $30 ,000 .00 doesn 't do a lot for you .
Krauss: Well it 's covering a lot of things but I guess Dave , do you want
to expand on that at all? We did take a look at this and try to get .
Erhart : I don 't want to get into it . If you 're satisfied that $30 ,000 .001
covers most of the road damage that you could envision.
Krauss: I 'd like their first born son too but we tried to come up with a I
reasonable number .
Hempel : Basically what we 're looking at is restoring the site and getting '
the vegetation back on the slopes and if they leave it in an unmanageable
site like they have left it right now . It gives us the opportunity to go
back .
Krauss: Keep in mind too that this being approved on a phased basis and
each phase is going to have to be tidied up before they go to the next one
If the City Engineer isn 't satisfied that they 're acting in compliance wit
t1
that phasing program , we 'll shut it down so that will tend to limit the
damage .
Erhart : Well it doesn 't take long to spend $30,000 .00. . . I have one othel
thing is that I don 't understand why this has to be allowed on Saturdays .
The reason I say that is I , you know this is a semi-residential , II agricultural area . People want to go home to their homes on Saturday and
have some peace and quiet and when they were working before on Saturday and
Sundays , I could hear it from my house and I live farther away from the I
people than the people do in Pioneer Hills and it wasn't bad but you know
if it was a major issue to getting this thing done , I would object to it .
On the other hand , it seems to me in consideration of all the other issues ,
that we could limit this thing to a normal work week and not try to be
intrusive on the neighbors as much as possible and I 'd sure like to
.consider not allowing it to be done on Saturdays because it does make noise
and you can hear it all day long. It 's a constant drone of earth movers '
and equipment so .
Krauss: The ordinance does establish those times but it allows you to be II more restrictive if you think it 's necessary to so it 's really your call .
Erhart : Okay , well again just in summary . I think it 's okay . I think it's
something that we don 't , the alternatives are worse and we ought to go II ahead and approve it . I 'd like to see , I guess you reconsider the letter
of credit . Really having enough monies to cover it in a worse case
situation and restrict this to Monday thru Friday operation.
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 10
' Conrad: Paul , you 've done a real nice job . In fact on all the staff
reports tonight they 're really thorough . It really helps . There are so
many issues that you bring up with your analysis that may , well I really
' appreciate it but it gives me confidence that you know what you 're talking
about and that the City has some control in what we 're doing here . In this
particular case you 're putting on a lot of controls yet I don 't see what
they are . The words are we will have to control . We will have to monitor .
' To be honest the track record hasn 't been great as other people have
previously said . I 'm not going to hammer that in but that makes me nervous
because of some past incidences and because we 're nervous about this in our
community . I don 't have , it tells me until they are proven that they
accept our guidance or our control , it tells me that we need to over
control and as other commissioners have said , and especially Jim , that over
' control has a cost on the City staff . Maybe you can help me Paul but it 's
the case , we can charge for that control . I didn 't see it specifically in
this . Is there , I 've gone through it several times right now . I saw it
for the other one . I thought I saw it in the Halle . Is there a charge? I
' thought I saw $30 .00 an hour type of .
Krauss: Yes . It 's in condition 2 which is pay the Uniform Building Code
' permit fee , County and staff and I think Commissioner Wildermuth added
Sheriff 's Department 's time to monitor and inspect the operations to be
charged to the applicant at a rate of $30 .00 an hour .
' Conrad: Who is doing that?
Krauss : Who will actually be doing the monitoring?
' Conrad: Right .
' Krauss: I think two of them are sitting at the table right here . It will
be our staff in conjunction and coordination with the county staff .
Conrad: And how do you determine? I 'm really concerned about enforcement .
' Absolutely like I 'd want you out there every day . I 'm just not comfortable
at this point in time . I think this should go through and Annette , as you
said , this doesn 't seem like it 's in character with what we 've been trying
' to do in Chanhassen . I kind of agree yet on the other hand I think as I
looked at staff report , I think it 's permitted . I think it can be done
and I think if it 's done right , we 're not going to have any problems . But
' again , I 'm not convinced that it 's going to be done right and that 's just
where I 'm at right now . That 's a problem .
Loren Hebbeger : Can I make a statement on this?
Conrad: Sure .
' Loren Hebbeger : You know a developer comes to an area to come in and
improve things and try to put it to it 's highest and best use . I feel that
you know you talk about over monitoring things . This can get out of hand
' too .
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 11 1
Conrad: We prefer not to . We really try to keep government out of it as I
much as we can but that site has not , you haven 't given us any confidence
out at that site yet and you haven 't been in the area and done some
projects that we can say oh yeah . They 're reputable . They 'll trust us .
They 'll stop when we tell them to stop . They 'll fix the erosion control
barrier when we tell them to stop . They will do it immediately . They 'll
fix it immediately . I 'm not convinced of that .
Loren Hebbeger : I guess the thing that this revolves right back to Don ,
that a permit was issued originally here and I think it could have been in
a real legality situation from a standpoint . It was represented. You I
people issued a permit as far as I 'm concerned that we tried to live with
and it has cost us some money as a result to shuffle to other sites . This
site would have been hauled out and been all done already and ready for
development if we wouldn 't have had these problems . I guess the thing is , I
Mr . Jeurissen is involved in the development of the property with the group
and he is not going to let his property be downgraded to a point where it '
not going to be developable . I guess you people can put a lot of
restrictions on . In Chaska for an example , they had an inspector that
looked at the elevations of what we were shooting as far as what we hauled
out . There was no problem . If you 're improving the property , granted you
can be over cautious on things but if it 's not going to hurt anything , you
engineering staff has got an elevation topo of what we 're going to do .
What 's going to be done and as far as a bond , a bond will take care of tha
situation . I don 't know what over restrictions , it 's just going to make i
rougher for a person to come in here . If you 're going to do this with
everybody rather than this situation and I feel this situation goes right
back to Moon Valley because of their situation there . Now as far as I 'm I
concerned , Moon Valley is not even .
Conrad: I hear what you 're saying but here 's something that 's very
different for this area . You 're bringing in a lot of trucks . You 're
hauling some land . You 're telling us you 're improving it . It 's hard for
us to accept the fact that you 're improving the site by hauling out the
clay . That 's a tough one to accept .
Loren Hebbeger : Let me give you an example .
Conrad: When we in this area are trying to keep those areas as natural as
possible . We 're trying to make them very liveable so some of the things
you 're saying is not in concert and it probably shows that you really
haven't been in Chanhassen working with us as much as we 'd like to have yoll
work with us.
Loren Hebbeger : I guess Don what I 'm saying is this area is set up for 2 I
1/2 acre tracts . Do you want to put a house up on top of a hill that you
can 't even get to with an elevation from a roadway standpoint? I don't
know . '
Conrad: It 's zoned agricultural isn't it?
Loren Hebbeger : It 's ready to be developed as a 2 1/2 acre . '
I
11 Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 12
' Conrad: But it 's zoned agricultural .
Loren Hebbeger : At this point . At this point yeah .
' Conrad: And that 's , in many of our thinking , that 's not bad zoning and it
will be developed for residential sooner or later but again , you 've heard
the commissioners talk here . They 're saying that yeah , you 're going to be ,
' from our standpoint it looks like you can do it but you haven 't . What the
staff is also telling us , they 're uncomfortable with a lot of things .
Truck movement . Erosion control . A lot of , you 're moving a lot of dirt
' and when you do that , you 've got to have some controls .
Loren Hebbeger : I agree with your concerns .
' Conrad: What I 'm telling you is because you don 't have a good record in
town , we have to over control which is what we don 't want to do . I really
would rather not have these people . Chanhassen 's not making that much
money off of this deal . It 's just not and we 're saying well let 's allocate
a lot of our time to make sure that it happens right because it hasn 't
happened maybe according to what we 'd like to have had done in the past .
Our fault . Your fault . It just hasn 't worked so now you 've got to prove
to us .
Loren Hebbeger : Alright but I guess what I 'm saying to you right now , are
you doing this with every developer that comes in that 's going to move any
material in the future? I think .
' Conrad: You 're the first one that we 've looked at .
Loren Hebbeger : Okay . This situation , we held back because of your
resolution that you were passing .
Conrad: I thought you continued after we told you to stop .
' Loren Hebbeger : Well the thing is , it was represented to start out with
the original engineer . There was not litigation done on this thing . It
was close to that point because it was represented from day one from an
' underlying standpoint here and I don't know , what staff happened to staff
but you can 't blame somebody that issued a permit and it was represented to
them as such that we were going to do this in a phase situation . All of a
sudden we get shut down because , we feel that we got slighted because of
the Moon Valley situation . Now we 're going right back to that point and I
don 't think it 's fair because we 're putting this thing to a housing
development . We 're not a mining permit as far as taking gravel out and
' digging a hole .
Emmings: This is a clay mine . You're mining this property to take the clay
and sell it to somebody else .
' Loren Hebbeger : It 's part of the development situation . There 's overages
there that we feel that we want to get rid of .
1
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 13
Emmings: And you would have gotten rid of it even if it meant that you hall
to pay to dump it someplace?
Loren Hebbeger : It wouldn 't have made any difference . We 're going to mov
it . That 's the situation . Thank you .
Conrad: Anyway Paul . We 've gdt a creek running through here and that
creek , in terms of the impact of this development , how do you assess how
you control any kind of pollution? Any kind of runoff into the creek . Wh
develops those plans . Is it the applicant? Is it the staff? How do we
monitor? Who monitors?
Krauss: The erosion control plans have been developed by the applicant .
We 've asked for improved ones . We coordinate our efforts with the
Watershed District . There was some temporary , when they closed up the sitil
in the spring there was temporary measures in place to minimize erosion .
They 've since blown out and there 's substantial damage and impact to the
creek right now . The first thing we want to have done on this site is
correct that existing situation .
Conrad: And how often would we monitor something like that . Once those
get in , what would be a monitoring schedule to see that they 're still in
force or in place .
Krauss: I guess I 'd defer that to the engineers who have more experience I
with that than I .
Hempel : Either myself or another inspector would daily monitor the site . I
Conrad: Would you really?
Hempel : We do that to all our improvement projects . Daily visit the sitel
to make sure the improvements are going to according to the plans.
Conrad: Really?
Hempel : Yes .
Erhart: Why don 't you , if you 've got erosion running into the creek rights
today , why isn 't it corrected today?
Hempel : We have made attempts to get the applicant to do that but so far I
we 've had no luck.
Erhart: What have you done on those attempts? What kind of action? '
Hempel : We 've stated in letters . Certified letters to the applicant to
restore the site . Maintain erosion control throughout . Reseed it and it '
failed to generate any action .
Emmings: So there you go .
Conrad: And how long has this happened or lasted?
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 14
Hempel : Since probably the end of May . Since the project has stopped .
' Krauss: I 'd also like to add , we have no letter of credit at this point to
draw on . Had we had that , we would have already drawn it .
Emmings: Did they in fact set aside topsoil on the part that they 've
excavated so far?
Hempel : There is topsoil stockpiled on the site right now .
Erhart: Did some of that topsoil run down into the creek?
Hempel : That site it was placed directly on top of the knoll so it
basically sheet drains in every direction so it probably did not get
' concentrated enough to flow into the ditch .
Conrad: I 'm not sure , like Tim said , the $30 ,000 .00 letter of credit .
We 've got to trust , you 're the professionals . It just doesn 't seem , based
on the magnitude of what 's happened here and Tim you 've got to help me
because you have a better sense for some of this stuff but it just doesn 't
seem like that can compensate for some of the things that can go on .
' Whether it be the pollution or the road , it just seems like it 's a small
amount .
' Wildermuth: Yeah , just what we heard about the creek . It sounds like the
City 's going to have to go in there and make the correction if the
applicant isn 't going to do it so we 've got to probably double this bond so
we can afford . . .contractor to go in there and get the job done .
Krauss: We tried to take a shot at what was a reasonable dollar amount .
We talked with our engineering department about that . The number is not a
' magic number . There wasn 't a formula that we used to derive it .
Wildermuth : Well what we just heard about creek erosion problem is
consistent with everything that 's gone on in the past with the applicant .
I guess it 's about time we take some action .
Erhart: Let 's say you get a storm and you see clay and dirt washing down
' into the stream , how fast can you respond if they won 't? What do you give
them 30 days to do it or 1 day?
' Hempel : We give them 72 hours to restore the erosion control or we 'll end
up doing it and charging it back to the project .
' Erhart: 72 hours . Why so much time?
Wildermuth: It 's not easy to get a contractor right?
Hempel : Yeah , most contractors comply within 24 hours but legally there 's
something we have to give them 72 hours .
' Wildermuth: How can we have it , I don 't mean to be smart but how come we
haven't gone in with the city contractor or city hired contractor at this
1
. 1
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 15 II
point to correct the stream? I
Folch: I don 't think we 've had any way to recoup our costs if we did go in
and do that . I
Wildermuth: Okay . So now you 'd have some bond money to draw on .
Erhart: I would think as a minimum condition here that this should not bell
approved until the site was brought up to the standards . Add another
condition here . Contingent upon bringing it up to current standards for
erosion control . I 'd like to have a response from Loren . Do you have to I
work on Saturdays?
Loren Hebbeger : I guess basically what we 're looking at is to get this
project done as quickly as possible . That 's our intent . We could probably'
have this thing done within a 60 to 90 day period . We go in there and
we ' ll be out . As a matter of fact , it would have been done already . '
Erhart : All phases?
Loren Hebbeger : All phases . We 've got a volume that we can move fast and
like I said , we 've already hauled 120 ,000 yards out of Chaska within just
little over a month so I guess I 'm not trying to push this thing along but
what our interest is is to get this developed to an agricultural situation !'
back for Mr . Jeurissen who will be participating in the development . We
just want to get the job done is what it amounts to . The reason why that
erosion has helped , as far as certified letters , we have not received
anything from the shut down and Mr . Jeurissen is the applicant and this
goes back to , when?
Bruce Jeurissen: Middle of May . '
Loren Hebbeger : The middle of May . So as far as erosion control , we 're
100% for that but we have not even been made aware of anything . As a
matter of fact , this permit was supposed to be issued within a short perioc'
of time . Of course we had a lot of rain . Don 't get me wrong but we 're
sorry if there was a problem there but we were not made aware of it .
Emmings: Have you been out to the site?
Loren Hebbeger : Yes . I have been . Mr . Jeurissen lives there . ,
Emmings: Yeah , have you been out to the site since May?
Loren Hebbeger : On probably a weekly basis, yes. ,
Emmings: Have you noticed that the erosion controls that you put up were
no longer there or no longer functioning? '
Loren Hebbeger : I don 't feel that there 's anything really serious about
the situation .
Emmings: You 've looked at them and they look okay to you?
1 .
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 16
' Loren Hebbeger : Right . This has occurred all over the metropolitan area .
Erhart: What 's occurred?
Loren Hebbeger : Soil erosion problems . I mean it 's .
Erhart : Do you feel that dirt has washed into the creek?
' Loren Hebbeger : No . I don 't feel that there 's anything excess . As a
matter of fact , Bruce is the one that 's basically on site every day .
' Erhart : I 'm asking you . Do you feel that dirt has washed into the creek?
Loren Hebbeger : Nothing of excess . It went down the hill into a swampy
' area is basically what it amounts to . You can talk to Mr . Jeurissen . I
mean he 's the one that 's there . I 'm not trying to argue here with you . I
guess I don 't feel that there 's a big problem here .
Hempel : If I could comment on that . A recent site inspection about a week
ago the culvert that was installed underneath this project , both sides of
' the culvert did have rip rap on in the initial installation . However , due
to the recent rains here over the summer , the rip rap is now downstream of
the culvert . Also , the erosion control was put up along the south side of
the site and along the east side and along the ditch . There was left an
' earth berm approximately 3 to 4 feet high and that earth berm has broken
through at a weak point and has been , the channelization and source of all
the erosion going directly into the ditch .
Erhart: How many yards would you estimate went into the ditch?
Hempel : There 's not a sand delta built up where this point enters the
' ditch . However you can see remnants of it downstream where the silt has
filtered out in the slower water .
' Erhart : Less than 100 yards?
Hempel : I would say approximately less than 100 yards , yes .
' Conrad: Okay . Well , I think we have to have staff review the amount that
we 're talking about in terms of a letter of credit . I think we have to
have staff give us some kind of commitment in terms of the monitoring
because I see , now that I found it , the $30 .00 per hour rate . You know , it
just appears to me we need a lot of monitoring and we need staff to pay a
whole bunch of attention to this until we 're convinced that the applicant
' is running it within the scope of this permit . I think Steve you said that
nothing happens , Tim brought that up? Okay . I think that 's important .
Essential and you know that one thing I hear in Chanhasse more than any
' other thing is the lack of enforcement . The lack of monitoring . I 'm not
hearing criticisms with some of the ordinances . I 'm hearing from neighbors
that they don 't do anything about it . And geez , here 's a case where I 'd
prefer to spend staff time a different way . $30 .00 an hour , I 'm not sure
' that that , I 'd rather use the staff for something else to be honest . That
seems like a waste of time to go out and monitor this with something that 's
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 17 ,
in the future . Something that 's a mining operation basically and really
doesn 't benefit the community a whole lot at the current time . So I
guess I 'm really, I guess I challenge the staff to figure out how this
doesn 't cost us time away from other projects to tell you the truth . Yet
on the other hand , where we monitor this thing , because I 'm concerned . I 'll
flat out concerned and until they prove to us that they can work acceptably
well here in the City and geez , I don 't think we 're that tough to work
with , I think we just have to be really concerned . Especially with the fact,
that we 're basically strip mining . We 've exposed stuff . We 've got
drainage problems . We 've got wind problems if it 's a dry summer . We 've
got traffic problems . There 's a lot of considerations that bother me aboull
this and maybe that 's just because I 'm not familiar with what it is . I
would hope that we could do it as quickly as possible . Just get it done
with and then we don 't have all this stuff . Then our monitoring can be
shrunk too but .
Loren Hebbeger : Let me just make a statement here . We 've moved a lot of
material in different areas and basically if you 've got a letter of credit
or a bond , that basically ensures that all specs will be met and if they 'r
not met , you call a letter of credit or the bond . I don 't think you need
an inspector out there , which I can agree with what you 're saying is your
people are more valuable to be on another site and if the thing is trashed
which I 'm sure Mr . Jeurissen is going to let his site be trashed because
he 's involved with the development . I agree with what you 're saying but all
the same time , the bond or letter of credit will cover any problems that i
it 's not done according to specifications , you call it . That 's the
situation .
Conrad: You know we review a lot of development proposals here and many
times we feel we get burned because we 're nice guys .
Loren Hebbeger : I admit you 're concerned.
Conrad: . . .take care of it and we 've been burned on people clear cutting .
We 've been burned on a lot of environmental things and it's one of the few'
assets . It 's one of the assets we try to preserve and that 's the
environment . It 's whether it be the bluffs , the trees , the creeks , the
water . When you say that you 've been there since May and some of our
erosion control vehicles are down and not working , I 'd rather not have
staff tell you . I 'd rather have you figure that out and you take care of
it . I 'd rather , you know that 's the point of your business is to make sur
that you don 't harm anything else so just the nature of some of the things'
being brought up tonight makes me concerned. Makes us tell staff watch
them and that 's not fun to do . We 'd rather not do that .
Loren Hebbeger : I can agree with your concerns and I can't argue with you
one bit .
Emmings: I think an investment in monitoring this one is also justified di
the fact that as more proposals come in, we 're going to have a better base
of knowledge on how to deal with them . So I think it 's important to just
to gain some knowledge and experience with these types of projects .
1
' Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 18
Conrad: Anything else? Is there a motion?
' Emmings: I 'm going to move that , let 's see . What am I moving? I 'm going
to move that we approve Interim Use Permit #90-2 to excavate material from
the 3eurissen farm subject to the conditions in the staff report with the
following changes . You have an introductory statement there that violation
of these conditions would result in immediate suspension of operations .
Now is that , I 'm wondering if that shouldn 't be a condition as opposed to
being in a little preamble there .
Krauss : That would be fine .
Emmings: Or is that what the .
' Krauss: That is provided in the ordinance in terms of revoking .
Emmings: Well let 's make it explicit so I guess what I would do is add as
number 12 that sentence that 's contained as the second sentence in that
' opening paragraph . Then as number 13 , a new one that would say that prior
to issuance of this permit the applicant shall repair the existing erosion
controls and remedy any problems caused by failure to maintain those
' controls to date to the satisfaction of the City Engineer . Also , in number
4 , we 'd limit the hours of operations to Monday thru Friday as opposed to
Monday thru Saturday .
Wildermuth: Why take Saturday off though?
Emmings : That 's my motion .
Erhart : I second it .
Ahrens: Are we going to increase the letter of credit?
Emmings: My understanding is that his direction to staff was to review the
amount in the letter for credit and make sure it 's adequate between now and
I the time it goes to the City Council . So I guess my motion is made taking
that into consideration that that will be done .
Krauss: Could I possibly ask you to modify that? You know we wanted to
make sure that we were going to bill back our time at $30 .00 an hour and
that 's in there but under subheading or under condition 1 I 'd like to add a
' bullet that says cover costs of site monitoring so that it 's clear that we
can use the letter of credit to draw against .
Emmings: Alright . I 'd include that in my motion .
Erhart: Okay , I 'll second the motion .
' Conrad: Any discussion?
Wildermuth: Do you want to include monitoring of the haulage by the
sheriff 's department or the County patrol and compensation for that?
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 19
Emmings: Why don't you make a motion for an amendment . I guess I don 't
understand . It seems to me , it 's more important to me that the staff know
what 's going on out there than that the county sheriff 's office . If the
county sheriff has to go out there to check some things , I guess I don 't I
feel that .
Wildermuth: I 'm concerned about the road and the safety aspect of it with
that intensive hauling . ,
Emmings: That 's the County 's job it seems to me . That 's , well of course
we pay them to do that don 't we?
Krauss: Well I mean the County is out there patrolling all the time in
terms of the Sheriff 's department but we may want to ask them to do extra in
monitoring when they 're hauling to make sure that loads are tarped . To
make sure that they 're within weight guidelines . To make sure nobody 's
speeding so we may be in a position of asking the County Sheriff to put on
an extra patrol occasionally to back us up and we had anticipated being
able to reimburse their time as well .
Erhart : You 've thought that in your statement in item 1 included that?
Krauss: Well item 2 I think covers it but Commissioner Wildermuth would I
think wanted us to be more specific . We just said County staff time to
monitor and he asked that the sheriff 's deputy be added . 1
Emmings : Okay . I 'd amend the motion then to include that in number 2 . So
instead of City and County staff time it would say , City and County staff I
time and County Sheriff .
Krauss: Sure .
Wildermuth: What 's your thinking Steve on taking Saturday out of the
operating hours?
Emmings: I don't know . It just seems 'appropriate to me. I don't see why i
they have to be ripping up and down there when folks are at home I guess .
Saturdays is off time .
Wildermuth: But on the other hand , it seems like the sooner this projects
gets completed the less disruption .
Emmings: Make a motion to amend it.
Erhart: But on the other hand , what assurance do you have that they 're
going to try and get this thing done as far as they can . There 's
absolutely nothing on any piece of paper from this group that says it has
to be done in a year . In fact we gave them a permit what , how many years
ago and they went in and did it later so you 're basing this on the
assumption that they 're going to go in and do it as fast as they can .
Wildermuth: That 's true but I 'm assuming that they want to get the projecil
done because Mr . Jeurissen probably wants to get back into the farming
' Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 20
business or they want to develop it .
Loren Hebbeger : He wants to get certified. That 's what we 're basically .
It 's holding him up right now . That 's one of the reasons we want to be on
' the Saturday . Get the thing done and I think within a very short period of
time we can move the thing and get it done because the quantities will move
fast . We do need a Saturday . I just , 6 days a week in an orderly . As a
matter of fact Saturday 's a better situation because of the fact that
' there 's not as much traffic and we can move the material . Chaska , we had
no problem with that .
pWildermuth: Let 's not restrict the applicant .
Emmings: Make a motion to amend my motion .
' Wildermuth: I 'll make a motion to amend the original motion striking the
statement about restricting Saturday operations and allow the applicant to
operate 6 days a week .
Conrad: Is there a second? The motion fails .
' Wildermuth: Okay , we 've got a motion on the table .
Conrad: Any other discussion?
' Emmings moved, Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Interim Use Permit #90-2 to excavate material from the
Jeurissen Farm subject to the following conditions:
1 . Submit a $30 ,000 .00 letter of credit in a format acceptable to the
City . The letter of credit will be used to ensure the following:
' - maintenance of erosion control ;
- site restoration on a phase basis;
' - preparation of "as-built" grading plans preparing demonstrating
compliance with approved plans, on a phased basis;
' - repair of haul roads due to damage caused by the operation as
determined by City and County staff;
' - removal of mud and debris from haul roads as frequently as required
by City and County staff;
- control of dust and other nuisances;
- noise analysis and other testing if required;
- cover costs of site monitoring by City and County staffs .
2 . Pay a Uniform Building Code grading permit fee of $787 .56 . City and
County staff time and County Sheriff time to monitor and inspect the
•
e
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 21
operation is to be charged to the applicant at a rate of $30 .00 per
hour .
3 . Noise levels stemming from the operation are not to exceed MnPCA and
EPA regulations . If the City determines that there is a problem
warranting such tests shall be paid for by the applicant .
4 . Hours of operation are limited to 7:00 a .m . to 6:00 p .m . , Monday
through Friday and prohibited on National Holidays . If the City
Engineer determines that traffic conflicts result due to rush house
traffic flows , the hours of operation will be appropriately restricted "
No activity will be permitted during the U .S . Open Golf Tournament .
5 . Provide a revised erosion control plan for staff approval . The revise
plan should provide full protection for the creek , wetland and drainag
areas . Erosion controls to be established and approved by the City
prior to the start of excavation activity . Failure to maintain erosio
control will result in revocation of the permit . Under the first phas
of the operation , the applicant shall clean and restore the creek
channel to the satisfaction of the City Engineer .
Submit a revised grading plan prepared by a professional engineer 1
indicating that no area will be excavated below the 971 ' elevation to
ensure that homes can be built above the 969 ' 100 flood elevation in
the future .
6 . Obtain approval of the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District
and maintain the operation in full compliance with their requirements . II
7 . Excavation to be phased in accordance with approved plans . As-built
grading plans prepared by a professional engineer indicating finished
grades shall be prepared by the applicant for each phase , for City
approval , to demonstrate compliance with approved plans .
8. Site restoration shall be completed on a phased basis before work is II
allowed to proceed on the following phase . Provide a revised
restoration plan indicating depth of top soil and ground cover for city
approval . Slopes over 18% are to be permanently vegetated with an
acceptable ground cover .
9 . The applicant will be held respnsible for controlling dust and fumes
from the site . A plan providing details of the method to be employed
to clean truck tires before they exit onto the public right-of-way is
required for staff approval . It shall be installed prior to the start
of work . It shall further be the applicant 's responsibility to clean II
the public right-of-way as often as required by staff .
10 . Pioneer Trail is the only permissible haul road in Chanhassen . Other II
routings will require review and approval by the City Council .
Appropriate "trucks hauling" signage shall be posted and kept in good
condition . Prior to the start of work , the condition of the haul road
will be documented by the City and County staff and the applicant will A
be held financially responsible for all damage that , in their opinion ,
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 15 , 1990 - Page 22
is cuased by the operation .
11 . The City will work with the County Sheriff to coordinate speed and
weight checks . If trucks are violating traffic laws , staff will
require that the operation be shut down and will ask the City Council
to revoke the permit .
12 . Violation of these conditions will result in the immediate suspension
of operations by city staff with the permit being brought back to the
City Council for review and possible revocation .
13 . Prior to issuance of this permit the applicant shall repair the
existing erosion controls and remedy any problems caused by failure to
' maintain those controls to date to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer .
' All voted in favor except Annette Ellson who opposed and the motion carried
with a vote of 5 to 1 .
Ellsori: I don 't think it meets our permit standards that are listed in
here . Number 2 and number 7 .
Conrad: And 2 and 7 are what Annette?
Elison : 2 is that it 's consistent with the City 's comprehensive plan and 7
is that it 's not going to involve activities that would be detrimental to
' people or property such as noise and traffic .
Conrad: This item goes to City Council September 10th . Thank you .
' Krauss : Mr . Chairman , could I clarify that? Because there was a desire to
work this through as quickly as possible , we 've been asked by several
people on the City Council to have this on their next meeting which is
' August 27th .
Conrad: Okay , thanks Paul .
1
r
I
t
I
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1