The URL can be used to link to this page

6. Wetland Permit Curry Farms/ .111 - , C ITY 0 F PC DATE: 7/18/90 M�7 CHAAE CC DATE: 8/13/90 • CASE #: 90-4 WAP 1 �y . By: Olsen/v I I STAFF REPORT I PROPOSAL: Wetland Alteration Permit for Removal of Wetland Vegetation in a Class B Wetland 1 Z LOCATION: 6480 and 6490 Bretton Wa y, Curry Farms subdivision a 1 V APPLICANT: Teresa Bearrood Jocelyn Hughes zi 6490 Bretton Way 6480 Bretton Way 1 ^ Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 i^L I4 • 1 PRESENT ZONING: RSF, Residential Single Family IACREAGE: Actin by City m rn:,;'<;r:tx DENSITY: sidwuicathAM...._ IADJACENT ZONING AND g-g.q LAND USE: N - RSF; single family pm sutmn;�:: to C,,:;m,ssi t IS - RSF; single family E - RSF; single family Dahl Subm;tted tcmoi W - Class B wetland WATER AND SEWER: QPHYSICAL CHARACTER. : The sites are developed single family lots Iwith a Class B wetland located in the rear W of the lots. I pf 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential I ti 0 END O O_ Q Q• alb i -I O 0 0 _ O 1 1 I . Q - � N I (, 1 „ 1 �ilk' �� gm_ �f � � ' ,/ LAKE � �, -4 � of o k_61) —i :• air..itosei5tizza R I F- 1 ; I�` . L U lam, 3-I y ,C, AL , -L E * �� A Ai. Illirlerli - ..-,Aiirriii„ -2- -- I.L...0-.--LL),_r- 1.171.4men., 4491 RIM '7-411 CA.__1 . '--1 . '') .."*. a MIN -‘- MilliW j Irliel f K IIIM T-aVi 4;(41 Atil REg 11171 ' 1 r a� zro till, _' ! LL ND lig I ' i.) a 7 - �� reea�co. i1,.' cc c!!� :t■■■■■■e�■�4�''`44"' '9•e � .,�=,� :v.prj, \ • \ , „,,, \\ \ „ \ ,, , %, ..... . 1.....„,___BIN al , t_.,01, p.m._ al mit iv 11 \ j VI FirAtinra It "" Mt, Wilt .2111F- re ‘1) ' , , ,... 1.40. f s 46._ _ 4 vp,-31, ----- ,-.- i. w NW et.--- titiv,,7 . Mitt tql z- ,- • ' ■41F■441111 - t 21. am „ 't -- I , LAKE Lucy gL-∎oU ■ 2 .... 1v4 ,!�' m"mA i1r` v. ------_, RD 447 `eta Va'rS--'ar 0 datt4ruv, .4'4,Ftar,■ I Ahrlac.mrchi al p,vi 5.:1 I,;t7' "II .#47 Im■-IZIO ---7J Wei It Pi III tlarrZI-7 Ida slilley I .: p i. .i. L A ' , On :.1) R 4 1-, volavt.„4 ., . 1:17--:. fi- - - I1„„::S•j 0p0 � E44`, �v LAdrE ANN S A: .gos or„,_ *. z II I \ RD _ , I i try? tair \ a ; co ...„0 ,o•cwir 0#0( 10-'21' 1‘ yckii __ NI_ Inv, 7 ild , volpfri 'Ilk .': Willi RR j W-'- . . R 1 _- ,1111111 1 - R 12 a 01 Bearood/Hughes WAP July 18, 1990 Page 2 BACKGROUND 1 On May 4, 1987, the City Council approved the Curry Farms subdivision and a wetland alteration permit (Attachment #1) . The wetland alteration permit was approved with the following conditions: --- --- -- -- 1. The Class A wetland shall be preserved by a conservation easement established at 75 feet from the ordinary high water mark. ' 2. The applicant shall provide drainage easements over the ponding areas throughout the site and not allow any alteration to the area. As part of the Curry Farms subdivision, 3 areas of Class B wetlands were processed through a wetland alteration permit to allow them to be dredged and used as holding ponds. The Class A wetland located at the westerly edge of the property was preserved as part of the wetland alteration permit. The Class B wetlands had been severely degraded by drainage and subsequent invasion of upland vegetation. Although the wetlands were of poor quality, the City still required the applicant to go through the wetland alteration permit process to allow the wetlands to be used as ponding areas (Attachment #2) . On Friday, September 9, 1989, staff visited the Curry Farms subdivision in regards to concerns about residents altering the wetlands located within the wetland. Staff spoke with some of the residents and informed them that the wetlands located within the subdivision were protected by the City. The residents that staff spoke with stated that there had been discussions about removing some of the vegetation so that the open water areas of the wetlands and wildlife would be visible to the residents. The residents felt that the wetlands were cattail choked and some of the vegetation should be removed. Staff emphasized the point that the wetlands were protected and for any alteration to the wetland, including removal of vegetation, a wetland alteration permit would be required. Staff requested the residents to organize and confirm what exactly they wanted to do to the wetlands and to meet with staff when they have a proposal prepared to then go through the wetland alteration permit. Upon later inspection, staff found that wetland vegetation had been 111 removed from the areas visited by staff. Staff then sent a letter to the Curry Farm residents stating that there had been removal of vegetation around the ponding areas and that these areas were protected wetlands by the City and that any removal of the vegetation required a wetland alteration permit. In speaking with .1 . •' Bearood/Hughes WAP July 18, 1990 I Page 3 I the residents, staff found they did not know that those were wetland areas and that they were protected by the City Ordinance. To allow the residents to be heard by the City Council and to clear up any misunderstandings, staff had the item on the October 23, II 1989, City Council agenda (Attachment #3) . After hearing comments from both staff and the Curry Farm residents, the City Council directed staff to work with the residents and applicable agencies Ito come up with a compromise which would allow removal of some vegetation and preserve the remaining wetland areas. On November 9, 1989, staff arranged a meeting at the Curry Farm I subdivision for residents to meet with City Staff, Department of Natural Resources, Fish and Wildlife Service and Corps of Engineers to discuss wetland areas, what purpose they serve and what type of I alteration, if any, is acceptable (Attachment #4) . As part of this meeting, the residents requested information on our wetland ordinance along with the definitions of a Class A and Class B I wetland. A complaint that the residents had with the City was that the wetland map does not show all of the wetlands and when they received a copy of the wetland map, the wetlands in the Curry Farms subdivision were not shown and they assumed that they were not ;' under the wetland ordinance. Typically, an applicant for a wetland alteration permit is required II to provide a registered survey of the wetland area illustrating existing conditions and what they are proposing to do. To help the residents go through the wetland alteration permit process, staff I surveyed the wetland areas and provided a survey to the residents from which they could work off of to determine what they ultimately wanted to do to the wetlands. Staff completed the survey of the wetlands in the spring of 1990 (see plans) . Once the surveys were I completed, staff again met with the residents with a representative from the Fish and Wildlife Service to discuss the existing conditions of the wetlands, including those areas of alteration and I what should ultimately occur with the wetlands (Attachment #5) . Since we are working to reach a compromise, we determined a percentage of alteration using the advice of Paul Burke from the I Fish and Wildlife Service from which to work with. At the meeting it was suggested that no more than 30% of the perimeter of the wetland be allowed to be open and that up to 60% of the surface area of the wetland could be open water free of vegetation. With I these numbers established, staff then left it up to the residents to make an application showing a proposal for each of the wetland areas. IANALYSIS So far the City has received two applications requesting permission Ito remove perimeter wetland vegetation from a Class B wetland. The II IF 1. Bearood/Hughes WAP July 18, 1990 Page 4 applicants are Jocelyn Hughes and Teresa Bearood, both located on Bretton Way. In the correspondence to the residents, this subject wetland was referred to as Wetland B located in the northwest corner of Bretton Way and Devonshire Drive (Attachment #6) . As of today, no clearing has taken place within this wetland. The perimeter of Wetland B is 560 feet which would allow 168 feet of wetland vegetation to be removed from the wetland edge. (Note: Approximately 250 feet of the wetland edge is City Park property which will not be cleared and can be used towards the 70% vegetated edge. ) The surface area of Wetland B is .36 acres (15,682 square feet) . ' Teresa Bearrood resides at 6490 Bretton Way (Attachment #7) . Ms. Bearrood is proposing to remove 70 feet of cattails from the perimeter and up to open water and then plant wild flowers of some type of ground cover in a four foot band along the edge of the wetland. Jocelyn Hughes resides at 6480 Bretton Way (Attachment #8) . Ms. Hughes is proposing to remove 80 feet of cattails from the perimeter up to open water and then plant a garden and wild flower area. The two proposals result in 150 feet of wetland perimeter being removed from a total perimeter of 560 feet. This leaves 18 feet of perimeter which could still be removed and maintain 70% of natural edge as recommended by the Fish and Wildlife Service. It appears the Hughes and Bearoods are the only lot owners adjacent to the wetland who wish to remove wetland vegetation. The remaining lot owners wish to leave it natural. CONCLUSION , Staff feels that the guidelines proposed by the Fish and Wildlife Service will serve the residents of Curry Farms and the City by allowing some clearing to occur yet allow the wetland to remain functional. As developments are approved today, any wetlands even those used as storm water retention basins are clearly protected by a conservation easement including a 75 foot setback which is recorded against each lot. In the case with the Curry Farms subdivision, the restrictions on the ponding areas were not recorded against each lot resulting in the residents not being aware that the wetlands located in the rear yards were protected by the City. Therefore, in the case of the Curry Farm wetlands, staff feels that such a compromise as that proposed by the Fish and Wildlife Service can be justified and supported by staff. Also the applicants, Teresa Bearrood and Jocelyn Hughes, have in good faith waited to receive a wetland alteration permit prior to performing any removal of wetland vegetation. .1 Bearrood/Hughes WAP July 18, 1990 Page 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: ' "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Wetland Alteration Permit #90-4 for Lots 4 & 5, Block 2, Curry Farms to allow a total of 150 feet perimeter vegetation be removed from the Class B ' wetland with the following conditions: 1. That no more than 168 feet of the whole perimeter of the wetland shall be permitted to be removed. 2. The wetland vegetation shall not be removed during breeding season. 3. If any purple loosestrife exists within the wetland vegetation proposed to be removed, the applicants shall follow the Fish ' and Wildlife Guidelines for removal of such vegetation. 4. The applicants are permitted to maintain the 150 feet of I perimeter open and will not be required to receive a wetland alteration permit every time the vegetation needs to be removed. " PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE On July 18, 1990, the Planning Commission reviewed the wetland ' alteration permit request of Teresa Bearrood and Jocelyn Hughes to remove wetland vegetation around the perimeter and within a Class B wetland. The Planning Commission has consistently recommended ' approval of a wetland alteration permit only if it results in an improvement to the wetland or if the wetland is in such poor quality that it is being replaced by a better quality wetland. ' The subject application will be clearing an area of open water but in such a manner that there will be an ongoing removal of vegetation and alteration to maintain the open area. This cannot ' be considered an improvement to a wetland. The Planning Commission felt that even with the history of this wetland, a compromise was not acceptable if it resulted in damage to a protected wetland. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the ' wetland alteration permit request. Staff spoke with one of the applicants after the Planning Commission meeting and the applicant wished to continue the request through to the City Council meeting. Staff recommended that the applicants contact the Fish and Wildlife Service, Corps of Engineers and DNR to have them comment on the wetland as to how it 11 I. Bearrood/Hughes hes WAP IF July 18, 1990 Page 6 1 can be improved, if at all, and that the applicants should then pursue an improved plan. RECOMMENDATION This has been a difficult application for staff since we were given direction by the City Council to work out a plan which would serve as a compromise for the Curry Farm residents and the City when staff has also consistently recommended only improvements to the wetlands. The original recommendation will provide a solution to the issue that was developed with the advice of the DNR and Fish and Wildlife Service. However, staff of those organizations would have preferred to further limit wetland disturbance and, as the Planning Commission pointed out, this sort of compromise solution is not consistent with the ordinance or with previous City actions. The City Council should either approve the wetland alteration permit request with the conditions in the staff report or follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission and recommend denial with the applicant's pursuing a plan which would improve the wetlands. ' ATTACHMENTS 1. Certification of Wetland Alteration Permit for Curry Farms. 2. Plan showing wetland areas. 3. City Council minutes dated October 23, 1989. 4. Letter to Curry Farm Residents dated November 1, 1989. 5. Letter to John Willman, Curry Farm Resident dated May 25, 1990. 6. Letter to Curry Farm Residents dated June 4, 1990. 7. Plan and application for Bearrood. 8. Plan and application for Hughes. 9. Letter to Curry Farm residents dated November 17, 1989. 10. Plan of wetlands. 11. Planning Commission minutes dated July 18, 1990. 1 I City of Chanhassen Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota IIn the matter of Chanhassen Planning Case : 87-6 Wetland Alteration Permit Owner: Centex Homes Corporation Applicant: same I Lot 1: 25-2620010 Street Address : P.I.N. :Lot 2: 25-2620020 Lot 12: 25-2620120 Legal Description : Lot 13: 25-2620130 Ilots 1, 2, 12, and 13, Block 1, Curry Farms IPurpose: For development within 200 feet of a Class A wetland. IZoning District: RSF, Residential Single Family The above entitled matter was heard before the Planning Commission I on April 22, 1987 and up for final action before the Chanhassen City Council on May 4, 1987 . The City Council ordered that a wetland alteration permit approval I (rota be granted based upon the documentation contained in Planning File 87-6 Wetland Alteration Permit sub.ject to the following conditions: 1. The Class A wetland shall be preserved by a conservation easement established Iat 75 feet from the ordinary high water mark. 2. The applicant shall provide drainage easements over the ponding areas throughout Ithe site and not allow any alteration to the areas. • 1 I State of Minnesota) )ss ICarver County ) I, Barbara Dacy City Planner for the City of Chanhassen, I do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing with the original record thereof, and have found the same to be a correct and true summary thereof. • IWitness my hand and official seal of C ianhassen, Minnesota, this 24th day of November , 19 87 . �'t -_ ' 1 G.0 . , 0. Chanhassen City Planner NOTE: ( I 4k I . . - . _ I. I. !1. .......-.0 ,_..., • !Hill CIO I • - • Will • • q . . .5 Ns 111111 ; * *------- , /i _...: 2_____. . _ ''1 -*--- aro*,. irtv...?„,„ g c•--1),;„ I . , z,„ . ......„ , Lt .............„---:•-1____,_.7., '-,- :.**,73--,- —. Z I C.> 5 .• , :_-- • ... )1.,.I. . , 4..9- ( • 1 ,-.. -./.1. / , . - ;II;i 'fr--1 -i 1 ■ \ ‘ ---.4 /,'. • - •,.;-.. -t 4-1 •-o \I • f i ; 1 • . , . . , I I 1 1:',1 1 .11114 . I J I i -•i t!z.11! , / 2 -/ .... //,‘,.. r -.., -! 1 // - • I IC i 1 1 I/ ;I 1.01' . ,,-...-..: _::..::—;, .......':• / .„,.4-: -7,,,... ___." - ;-1.1 ---- , ,I, g L6 NA / ' • ,• / i \ -7---_•.-7.-.— - N ff-.' /..• ...-- ”-------\, 1 Ili 1 • '■ ■ • ..'; 1 gi I .1: 1,......,:,........:.__,: -7 ....-„<.... . --... i s ,.4 _ --, r,i _q_ 1.__Iii .F; IT- g& It „. i. 1 , 1 -- - - ---, 4 I V ..,_4;11----T_ _. 2 Lu „E i u E - IL ,,/ ,.. 1 . . 7: ‘-.-- \ ; .../ \ti 1■ . ' '-•• ill 1 •L'•■•,:\ a\ • .• • 2 ' \ \ . / • 1 \ • --t-::-.: 11$ " 2 L......1 ' 7 . 11 il , ••\ \ . .... Irks — • - `'nill 1 i s - -----. '- - t• . \ 1\ 1 . T" . `11 11 I I I ,_, --: .4 ,'" ' ... ., . 1 ,.- - N ..., i ,-. .,« -- : • -., - LI -'• - ,, If-A 1.--• -- . •. m - , . k-,,,N--• fr.....:,- F...._ . ___EJ . iv.t f 1 , . ....:, ,,,„,-a ...) .,.: -- s-. —1. . ;.g , -2._, ...-- .-1 _____.... • .,:a.z..iailig_i -- , ::, -4...1..... II 11 ig. . •• it li • J. .,;','\., sv- • .■.' 'A-.'i, •I ..11 L. . ...,. - ° I a ,/ - irt- , '..i (1 b I ', • ., .....-. _- \.. ;\ ,,,..../ 4S- .-i-fi:;°•:'— NI •■• ..i, .,11fr..;•' .. .....,., ■:1 3 I I ••.:7„, ...... ,/ ' ',rid : '/ .'. ... .. • ,, , - • \ . iii - /...., IiitTi ' '•" : A -. ; 17(1. , 1, 111 . ....! ...: .,,•_ .,. 7. r , , ,./Iii , I"-- Ilin g .Lt1 — - .A 01/ 1#11 Itilill I 1 I...I • • .."'s• A 1. 00' I ' 1..'41 Ai \. ' II" . , ,; " I 9 . q I I'' / I VV I .1 It /44)"iii.!'''. • • gme.00441. goi 1..u....... i , ___ .. I • f /:.' %.i• il \.. / 1 ‘.... .e: ..1.+2 , . ,.,,,,,;,/ " s i • •,, -- ....... . .,' 11114%. i I g 1 \i• like:,'2• - ...:- • i•.( 'l. s* '1"1-4 -4-./. t 1. .I I 1 .. 7 . . I t fry(' -ii • •• 4 , . ......-..—.. '4 '‘, •"\ ' •,li 'I ... 11 11 111 1 _ -, 11 i If II ::ii I 7$th., .■, L c. 1 ( 4 1*A I , , .• . .--:-r•:•• -• -- .: . pi ..ff i I ,,, , , • •,•. , \--'-,Tt ' / • .. t -". 1 & \ . . - 4 • _ . .._.. • If, 1., . _ . ... .e._ !i\i„ .iti• .....\• \ • ,,•:,,••.-: , f. -•-•- - • - '•-• .4„ 1: 0- 1 . • - 0 1 ,\-,. . , 9)1 . • -..-:-.,..,-. •-••. -1„ • Ali se! -sr:.i • „V : .... ' I. . '' :,, ••••....\ s•'‘ .''''..Ik• 7_1),?11.!i';'• :7 _2.!__. ...„N,,,,,.' ... if 0 ow- ; opm-m.,_..e.• i 2,..,- ,No, 1 4, !:../' 4 1 . ....\-‘ • . .. 4. I \...›,:.1.' •-:.,/, .. .". -V , tde -\ • • 1 t -----. .4v .. --N. --_- -......- . •-• • 1 1 • . - •••••— :: t 1 II s'l\tt 4.'•1 •4'• ■"..--e4if:ll'i"'// ‘‘.■,41 i \I'..IY):' r...'' ;' 1 I-I—: .:•• 4 si ,,, 1 - II 111,.,\ -, \ \k::-. :-.7X----%f• 71:(1,// t i Ir.1- 1. - h ..I, 1 ■._I::/i i '.+ ill II , ... . \ / t' ......" ...• ' ,I))SillzV.I' ....::%4000 kk\\ • . e:j _. I ••, ,•, , • •,/, .---'-0 c=4":47:40/ •-=1013/://1111/1 :4\\ i ,•i; Ai, .. ...-• b , • %LI i <-E' iftg m I ii • / • f010J 1.C14 GlAe-h-A 1 A42.F.1A kfir0.5 14-1nR-04i it 2- I MIA .1 City Council Meeting - Oc er 23, 1989 6. Utilize concrete curb and gutter and design it to connect to improvements in Park Place that will be installed by the City. Add an additional catch ' basin at the Palk Place curb cut. All storm sewer located in public easement or ROW shall be reinforced concrete pipe. 7. Erosion controls are to be in place prior to start of work on the site and maintained until site restoration is completed. Additional erosion control may be required along the south property line by staff to prevent erosion into Park Road. ' 8. Add a fire hydrant on the parking lot island located off the northwest corner of the building. ' 9. Provide lighting and signage details for staff review. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Councilman Bout: Could I ask, could we go right to 12(b)? Councilwoman Dimler: I'll second that. I !" V2(B) CURRY FARMS WETLAND ALTERATION, SENIOR PLANNER. UV4 Jo Ann Olsen: This was brought in front of the Council tonight because there's been same activity out in Curry Farms which tpyically would require the residents to go through a wetland alteration permit to remove the vegetation around the ponding areas. The whole purpose for this was just to, I know that they were going to be contact with the Council, was just to bring therm up to date with what was happening and to allow the residents a chance to speak. I know it's really late and this could be a really long item so I'll kind of open ' it up to for them but essentially when Curry Farms went through the subdivision process, they also went through a wetland alteration permit and there were same low Class B wetland areas that were dredged and allowed to be dredged and used as ponding areas. As part of that, those areas have taken on qualities of a ' wetland. They now have cattails and other wetland vegetation. There has been same removal of that vegetation. Staff has contacted the residents stating that they would have to go through a wetland alteration permit process for that to be ' permitted. We understand their reasoning for wanting to remove it is to allow views into the ponding areas or to allow them to be used actively like in the wintertime and we acknowledge that there might be a compromise that we can came • ' to working on but they do have to go through the process because what is happening now is not the correct way and it's removing a lot of the vegetation and taking away the benefits of the area. So with that I guess I'll let them, however you want to do this. Maybe have one spokesperson. Mawr Qrmiel: That's what I'd really like to do. Can we have a spokesperson for this? ' Jo Ann Olsen: And there would be no decisions rade tonight. Also, there are residents who also do not like what is happening out there and wish to see the ' vegetation remain too. 84 1 City Council Meeting - nctober 23, 1989 I Councilman Boyt: I would encourage us to listen to anybody that wants to talk. Mayor Chmiel: I'm all for that too but as long as we can confine it to very , short, brief point. Please state your name and your address. Barbara Spiess: My name is Barbara Spiess and I live at 6610 Arlington Court. I think first of all that the whole situation didn't need to occur. It was set up as an advesarial situation with people from City Planning coming in, informing people they were going to fine them because it was a registered Class B wetland. I don't understand. We checked the plat and I called and several of us have checked with Carver County. The recorded description which was approved by the City has it listed as a drainage and utility easement and the Certificate of Title show no covenants, no restrictions, absolutely no conditions. Dedication of the plat shows no wetland designation so we continued to move on. I called Miss Olson who told me that on Friday and we had a meeting on Friday afternoon, she informed that yeah, they possibly were remiss and this is something that should have been done and probably would be done in the future but hasn't been done to date. So my question came back to, this was not even a pond prior to it being created as a detention pond for the area. So then I picked up the zoning codes. Well page 1189, Section 2404 Establishment of Wetlands, if I can read the last two sentences in that section. It says the wetland map entitled Chanhassen Wetland Map dated May 22, 1984 is hereby adopted as prima facia evidence of the wetland areas and an official copy is on file in the office of the City Clerk. Lard within the wetland area shall be classified as Class A wetland or Class B wetland as delineated on said map. Now we've got a copy of this map and we're not delineated as a Class A or Class B wetland. It didn't exist in 1984. It was a horse pasture from what we understand so then there was a little bit more confusion. There's no notification in the form of a lettez or public form or anything calling us together. There was simply a notification by City Planning of 3 families out of 34 that are impacted. When I asked why the rest of us weren't notified so that we could then understand the information, it was explained to me that Ms. Olson assumed that those 3 families would notify the rest of Curry Farms. I think that's a little, well anyway. It didn't happen and I don't really feel it was their responsibility. Again, back to where is it designated as a wetland? I can find it called everything except a wetland. Now Ms. Olson told me that it has been a wetland forever. Well, I picked up sae additional information and that information says that in 1987 when Curry Farms was proposed and when you were going through a City Council approval of the plat, that a Dr. Rockwell was called in and I assume that's Dr. Rockwell who's from the federal government? Fish and Wildlife. Dr. Rockwell, if it's always been a Class B wetland, why was Dr. Rockwell called in to determine whether it should be dedicated as a wetland or not? I think we're all so totally confused as to whether this is a wetland and I think it brings us a lot of issues. Number one there's a safety issue for our children. The reeds and cattails have grown up to the point where we cannot see to the interior of that pond. There are 67, approximately to 70 children about 55% under the age of 5. We can't see that water. Those reeds totally now, or prior to them taking them out, encompassed all of that. I think there's a safety issue and that it needs to be cleared out. We're not asking that it be environmentally raped or whatever. All we're asking is a parternship with us. Discuss it with us. Don't cage in weilding a club and telling us that we have violated a wetland ordinance where we can't find anything that designates a wetland ordinance. Not on the map which zoning says is prima facia evidence of wetlands and the City of Chanhassen nor on plats or on certificates of title or 85 , City Council Meeting - Or ')er 23, 1989 dedications of plats, nothing. And I think maybe there were some hurt feelings because we didn't just simply accept what we were told to do but there was ' research done by the people who were impacted by this in Curry Farms. I mean we didn't just say, ah, too bad. City Planning. Let's go out and pull reeds. We did look at it. We looked very carefully at it. We've also understood from calls that we've made to Fish and Wildlife and the DNR that we're going to lose ' what wildlife we have there or had there last year in the form of ducks and geese because if they have no access to shore, they will no longer care in there to nest. So my next question is, what are we dedicating this to? What is our ' plan? What is the long term goal that we're looking to do? Is it preservation for the sake of preservation for a detention pond or are we looking to bring in wildlife and who are the ecological environmental subject matter experts that ' are going to help us and tell us what we should be doing. We are more than happy I think and I think I can speak collectively for the people that are here, we're rare than happy to be cooperative but we'd like to see sane sort of a plan. Technically, if you get down to it, there are drainage areas all over. ' Drainage easements are everywhere. Are they all considered a wetland? What constitutes a wetland? One cattail that grows where there's water? We don't understand and we are seeking that information. Now one resident was told that ' he would get that information but that has not been sent out to him from the City and we have sought the information. Then what happens when you get to the park. I mean is the park a wetland? Can the people around the park not do any ' grooming of that at all because technically if we're using the same standards, then they have to be unilateral all the way around Chanhassen so the park is also a wetland. We're a little confused as to what direction that City Planning would like us to take and I think we're also a little confused and maybe, if ' there's any anger at all I think it's over the fact that what people were told is we can do this to you because we're the City and I think what we're confused about was we thought maybe we were the City. gybe as taxpayers we were the City. We weren't trying to destroy the property for our property values. We're trying to upgrade it. We knew we were responsible for maintenance and we thought we were maintaining and we were given no other options except stop. ' Don't touch it. You do not have the right and I think, I just don't see that that's a very pragmatic approach. Suitable for the City or for the residents of Curry Farms. It doesn't make a great deal of realistic sense to me. Long term or short term. The cattails can stay but I don't see that we've accomplished ' anything and right now the way it looks, if they overgrow and those drainage sewers or the grates are clogged with all of this that are going to fall eventually when we let it grow in, then what happens? Does it block up and go ' back in our back yards as it did last spring and then what's the impact to Christmas Lake? I think there's a lot more to it and I don't see that anyone had a long term plan as to how it was supposed to be handled. No peraneters seemed to have been created at all and I guess I'm a little bit concerned. I don't understand, if City Planning wanted to take a stand on wetlands, which I think is fine, I don't understand why the time and the tax dollars were spent on a marriade drainage and utility easement, essentially a detention pond. Thank ' you. Mawr Ctruel: Is there anyone else who would like to add to that? John Willman: My name is John Willman. I reside at 6510 Wellsley Court. I'm one of the 3 of which they're speaking who removed reeds from the land. What I would like to do is show you sage pictures of the pond if I may of when my house was first being built. It will show you basically the natural aspect of the way 86 City Council Meeting - nctober 23, 1989 11- the pond looked and was always meant to look in my opinion. I wish I could be as eloquent as Barb was in explaining our thoughts. Our main concern with the pond, my wife's and myself was not just to open it up for open water but for the fact that we have two young children and we were very, very concerned about the getting lose in the reeds so to speak. So we took those down. Not only did we do that but we went and we were very ecologically, for lack of a better word, motivated. We called the DNR. We tried to get in contact with the City Engineer. My wife left repeated messages for him to call. My wife is always have. She does not work and we also have a recorded. We never received any information back from this gentleman. I realize that he is a busy man so what we did do is we called the DNR and I asked them about removal, first of all if it was a wetland according to the State which it was not. Since it was not, I asked him if there was any problem removing the reeds. Not only did they tell me that there was no problem but they also told me exactly how to get rid of the reeds. So I guess we were concerned when people came around and told us that this was an improbable or something that should not have been done and I'd just like to say to you all that it wasn't done to impact or to hurt the environment., ' It was basically done to protect our children and to give a chance for the ducks and the geese to be able to get to land so same of can feed them. We appreciate that. Thank you. , Tan Schafer: I'm Tom Schafer. I live at 6501 Devonshire which is Lot 12 on there. I chose that lot because of it's climate orientation. That was very important to me. When I walked that lot in the spring of '88, there wasn't a drop of water in that back yard and when we went to look at the plot plan of the subdivision, I noticed the water shown on there and I asked the salesman what that was and he said it was a storm retention pond. That was his words. He said that all the runoff is eventually going to fill that thing up to a set point and that's the way it is but you own that property. That's your land back to the center. Where the lines were shown. I'm here to say that there wasn't any water there in the spring of '88 and if that map was done in 1984, how could this have been designated a wetland area? That's my comments. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Tan. Anyone else? Okay. Questions Council. 1 Barbara Spiess: Could I say one more thing? I'm sorry but...and I think it's very relevent and possibly not to the detention pond we're discussing but in driving around and now bearing conscience about this and in looking at registered Class A wetlands around the area, there are a number of Class A wetlands and it's very visible from the road. One doesn't have to travel fax to find them, that trees are being felled on them. Dirt is being rounded so water is diverted. They are legitimate Class A wetlands and I guess that concerns me from an ecological point of view that Class A wetlands or what would appear to be legitimate Class A wetlands are possibly being destroyed or altered and I'm certainly not casting aspersions at these people. Maybe they have a right to do it but I think if a map has never been updated since 1984, priorities should be such that we start looking for those Class A wetlands now in protecting then and listing then, if indeed that is prima facia evidence on a map because it is happening and they are all over the area. And I took an afternoon just to drive around and see and it's amazing how many, you can find lumber stacked this high were trees have been felled on wetlands. Same have been designated on the map and some are not. But if we truly are concerned about the wetlands and there is sanething that we want to do about them, I think it might be a terrific place to start in possibly those Class A wetlands are being destroyed might be a great ' 87 p City Council Meeting - Oc er 23, 1989 place to start. Thank you. Councilman Workman: Gary, aren't we mapping right now? Gary Warren: From the engineering department we have no wetlands map that's ' being prepared, no. We've done aerial topography of the entire city in April so we have a database. Councilman Workman: Apologies all around for everybody I guess. It's kind of an issue I guess that, I didn't ask if there was anybody else that wanted to speak either I guess. I'm jumping in but somewhere a misunderstanding got in the way and now we're, usually it's your whole neighborhood against us. Not the ' neighbors against each other. When we have developments and we need to create a retention pond and we're going to need clarification on wetlands ourselves probably. Take one pond for example, say the Rosemount pond which they had to basically create or any other housing development, we ask than to make uneven ' bottoms on those ponds. How it should be sloped. What should be planted around them. They're meant to do many things. One, take care of the filtration. The water that isn't going to go anywhere because of the hones up and around and I'm ' winging this one here, to sift through the mud and so that it won't go into other larger wetlands and to also provide for wildlife. Correct? So it's supposed to do everything. It's not meant to be a sewer. It is meant to be an ' infiltration place which because of development has been taken away and so where the City decides and when they decide this thing is a Class A wetland, is probably up for anybody's guess. ' Councilman Boyt: There's a procedure. Councilman Workman: But it's meant to be, and Bill's had a lot more and I'm sure if Jay Johnson was here he'd be foaming at the mouth right now. So you know, I'm sure if it looks like a wetland, it probably is one in my mind but how the legal, how the exact description of what that is. ' Councilman Boyt: I think staff opened it up with the right approach when they said they thing they can work with the neighborhood to get something that people ' can live with. There is apparently a good bit of confusion here. Anytime that I think those of us who work with these issues a lot make some probably assum+mptions that the rest of the community, maybe we don't do a very good job of educating then about. The wetland map in no way designates all the wetlands in Chanhassen. I think it was a pretty convenient way of saying we know these are wetlands but everytime a development canes in, if we suspect that there might be a wetland there, we ask Fish and Wildlife or the DNR to came out with our staff and go out and they investigate. It's our intent as a city to not drain wetlands so we require an alteration permit for anyone who wants to change those. If Mrs. Spiess discovered some damage being done to wetlands, you should report that. I think that's your responsibility to do that so we can follow up Ion then. There is, Tam let me take a minute here and just say I think if you can cane up with a plan that improves the ability of the wetland to do it's job, then I'm sure staff will be happy to work you with to accomplish that and made arrangements with the DNR and Fish and Wildlife and as a community, you may well be able to accomplish some of what you want and still protect that area. It seems to me like the reasonable thing to do. 1 88 City Council Meeting - 'tober 23, 1989 IF Barbara Spiess: Can I ask a question, and I'm confused again. So you're saying that what we thought we purchased as real property, even though there is an + ' easement on it, we understand that,.but what we felt was purchased as real property you don't have to designate on a wetland map. You don't have to declare a wetland? You can just simply at any given time say this now becomes a wetland. You should all be aware of this and as you are subject to whatever fines will ensue if you touch that particular wetland? Councilman Boyt: Mrs. Spiess, it's fairly common for the City Council to require developers to build wetlands whenever there's an opportunity. So if there's a drainage pond we, as Tam just mentioned, we've got 5 pretty specific criteria that the developer needs to follow so that that will became a wetland if it isn't now one. There are criteria that Fish and Wildlife have that set apart these wetlands in terms of whether they're Type A or Type B. The City is much more restrictive in how it handles wetlands than the State of Minnesota is by intention. We have a great many wetlands in this city and we feel they're extremely valuable. Staff can go through all this with you. They have a lot of background and I think that they'd be quite willing to see if something can be resolved with the neighborhood but it's my understanding that the development contract set those up as future wetlands. I know that given the history of the Council, at least during the 3 years I've been on it, that would have been our intention. If there would have been any possibility of creating a wetland, we would have done it. ' Barbara Spiess: I think that's fine. I don't think we...and I'm back to my original question. There is no process then? Once it does collect any water, then even though it is not designated a wetland, then we should take the initiative to call and say does this now constitute a wetland? Councilman Boyt: Well I can tell you that a wetland is a wetland by , characteristic, not by identification on the map. Barbara Spiess: Right. And where do we get those characteristics? Are they , documented? Councilman Boyt: Yes they are. Staff can give you those. Mayor Chmiel: Rather than having a lot of conversations going back and forth here, what I'd really like to see done is that staff does work with the neighborhood. I'd also like to see that they set up a specific meeting night. Bring in the DNR. People who can inform you as to what it is and what it consists of and hopefully we can resolve the given problems that are there. So with that I'd suggest that that's what we do and we appreciate the fact that you did came in this evening. We're sorry that you had to wait so long but it's one of those things. Councilwoman Dimler: I just wanted to ask Jo Ann, did I read somewhere that a 75 foot setback is not required? Jo Ann Olsen: That is correct. With this, the only area the 75 foot setback was required in Curry Farms was with the Class A, the large wetland to the west. The reason that the 75 foot setback was not required with these areas was that it would remove all those lots around there. They felt that they were low Class B wetlands. That they were going to be improved but that the 75 foot setback 89 1 - City Council Meeting - Oc per 23, 1989 wasn't necessary at this time. That was part of wetland alteration. ' Councilwoman Dialer: It wasn't necessary because it wasn't considered a wetland worth considering then? ' Jo Ann Olsen: Well it wasn't a large Class A wetland. Councilwoman Dialer: I find that a little bit... ' Jo Ann Olsen: It's just that part of working with the developer, it was just one of the things... ' Councilman Boyt: Compromise. Councilwoman Dirtier: But I mean, that does give a double message. That was my'. - point. II t1 Mayor Ctr,iel: Anyway, I would like to see that direction Bill and to work with "' the neighbors and to have a meeting and invite DNR in. Who would be the _- ' individual spokesperson to be contacted that Jo Ann can make the contact with? Don Ashworth: Maybe if Nann, you could pass around a sheet, we could get everybody's name and address and we'll send it directly to each one of them. ' Jo Ann Olsen: I've already got their addresses. ' Mayor Crrdel: You have a list of their names already and addresses? Jo Ann Olsen: That's why they're here tonight. Don Ashworth: What you have is the ownership for the Curry Farms area? Is there anyone out there who is not an owner in that area? Okay. So we have your ' names and addresses. Mayor Chniel: Okay, thank you. We appreciate your carving in and having you sit up with us this late. We needed it to keep us awake. REVIEW APPRAISAL FOR CARRICO PROPERTY. ' Councilman Workman: I would denial right or move on with it? Is it something we have to discuss? ' Councilmen Dialer: Yeah. Councilman Workman: Isn't it dead? ' Lori Sietsema: Basically the Park Commission reviewed the appraisals that were prepared for the City and the one that was prepared for the landowner. They ' cane in at the, the two that came in that were prepared for the City came in at $58,000.00 and $85,000.00 for the entire 11 acre site and Mr. Carrico's cane in at $330,000.00 for the site. The Park and Recreation Commission felt that going through the condemnation process, there was no guarantees that it would be came in close to our appraiser's price and recd mended to the City Council not to ' 90 • CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 November 1, 1989 1 1 Dear Resident: Chanhassen staff has arranged for representatives from the Department of Natural Resources , Fish and Wildlife Service and Corps of Engineers to meet on site at the Curry Farms subdivision on November 9, 1989, at 9 :30 a.m. The purpose of this meeting is to review the wetland areas to determine the type and quality of the wetlands, what purpose they serve and what type of alteration, if any, is acceptable. This meeting is being scheduled at the direction of the City Council to provide information on what deter- mines an area is a wetland and why they should be protected. The on-site visit is scheduled for the benefit of Curry Farms resi- 1 dents. An informational meeting on wetlands will be held in the evening, in the near future, for the general public. Curry Farms should have representatives attend the meeting. Staff 1 will meet at the wetland behind Welsley Court at 9: 30 a.m. on Thursday, November 9, 1989. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Jo Ann Olsen Senior Planner JO:v cc: City Council Planning Commission Don Ashworth Engineering Dept. Building Dept. 1 41_ 1 CITYOF 401 CHANHASSEN AMS- 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900* FAX (612) 937-5739 May 25, 1990 Mr. John Willman 6510 Welsley Court ' Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear John: This is to confirm that we will meet with you and other interested Curry Farm residents on Thursday, May 31, 1990, at 5:30 p.m. If possible, we will meet in your neighborhood. If not we can meet at City Hall. The purpose of the meeting will be to go over the site plan which shows the existing lots in relation to the wetland areas, discuss what alteration has taken place, what is proposed . ' and the wetland alteration permit process. Please pass this information on to appropriate persons. Should you 11 Sincerely,any questions, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, Jo Ann Olsen ' Senior Planner JO:t ' cc: Barbara Spiess Jocelyn Hughes 1 I i . ..._. fa C ‘ _,: 5---F0 . 6d, ret-eir- ir CHANHASSEN 1 ,_..„,t, 4 .„ .3 „ 1,A.,, ,.=w 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147• CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 Nk * (612) 937-1900• FAX (612) 937-5739 June 4, 1990 Dear Curry Farms Res' I ry Resident: Attached is a map illustrating the edge of the wetland on your I property with the measurement of the perimeter of the wetland area (distance around the wetland) and the surface area of the wetland. On May 31, 1990, City Planning staff and Paul Burke from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service met with some Curry Farms residents to discuss the wetland alteration process and what staff will be I recommending to the Planning Commission and City Council. Using the expertise of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Corps of Engineers and the Department of Natural Resources, the City will be recommending allowing up to 30% of the perimeter of the wetland to be free of I wetland vegetation and up to 60% of the surface area of the wetland to be open water, free of vegetation. In discussing the wetland between Arlington Court, Wesley Court and I Devonshire Drive (Wetland A) , it was determined that more than 30% of the perimeter wetland vegetation has been removed and that staff Iwill be requesting that some of the areas be returned to a natural state to maintain a maximum of 30% of open perimeter. Wetland A has a perimeter of approximately 653 ft. which would allow an open edge of 196 ft. The surface area of Wetland A is .5 acres (21,780 I sq. ft. ) . In discussing the wetland at the northwest corner of Bretton Way I and Devonshire Drive (Wetland _a) , it _was stated that the same percentage of clearing would be permitted (30% perimeter and 60% surface area) . As of today, no clearing has taken place within Ithis wetland, but the City has received an application to clear some of the vegetation. The perimeter of 'Wetland B is 560 ft. , which would allow 168 ft. of wetland vegetation to be removed from the wetland edge. (Note: Approximately 250 ft. of the wetland I edge is City park property which will not be cleared and can be used towards the 70% vegetated edge. ) The surface area of Wetland B is .36 acres (15,682 sq. ft.) . I The wetland at the northwest corner of Devonshire and Lake Lucy Road (Wetland C) will also have the same guidelines applied. 1 W T 1 Curry Farms Residents I June 4, 1990 Page 2 Currently only one lot has cleared wetland vegetation and has also t filled into the wetland area and drainage easement. The perimeter 's .� of Wetland C is 437 ft. which would allow up to 131 ft. of wetland ' edge to be cleared. The surface area of Wetland C is .3 acres (13,068 square feet) . Attached is an application which may be filled out and returned to the Planning Department along with a copy of the survey showing what is proposed as far as wetland alteration. A joint application would best serve the residents adjacent to Wetland A. The application should be made by June 18, 1990. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 937-1900. Sincerely, ' Jo Ann Olsen Senior Planner ' JO:k cc: Paul Krauss, Planning Director Don Ashworth, City Manager City Council Planning Commission • 1 1 ..:-.1 i Ai si --k..-sek.---,-,•- 7:: .--.i.=,.1---,E.-------? :.'-..- 7. I -. : I 0 1V ', • ., ----."-sti-I - -- •-...,:, . _ ./ / a - - 4:- . ' '....-. :I.,"*.l..arf / I -"A N... - .... .._ I V I - .- `. _19 4°1. .-t '.--4--C.. " •-; i ' z-t- -' ---._ . . , .. ./ i - .evir 1/4. I • ...1 I - - lb/ 4b. •.r. / ' . .• - - ' -" - • 1/4 • . 1 /•'''• Ale 3 '‘ I---a.4e246. --.,--.1 , A13 ze ./ _ %* --* ..•.. I •/' : -- . ...... L 1.: JP6,4, . •■•• ' / • .. 4, t . - •- - • -104 li, oe 51 on'as " ..... / • . .., i 4.-- 1 -•. : - 31 1 4 i It I C7* 17 . a, .. .. ., 1 . ., . N c -It . -:-.51 • 0.,I 0 ar) V i"-:4 ‘142 ei. r 1 'fv, Li'4.16 63,, \s• • . 4 ev ify 4,0 0 . 4cs 0 ..„.„_ ....... . i CPi ,,„° • 7 - a.iirE, -,, g• 5.23'I ii.rs II . v,,\ - - -'-e: - t,- ...... .c 00°19a.31E •• •.1 a) wi • I g V II 2 „e .._ . .."._- 0.00 .14. -1 t'„ - .......__ __ _. _... .__ ...... ....3 1:0 -As - e 12 4 LS 1°3. r a *n an - -- • z.itt\I- ------sto - - - ... .14.16 • fr-,•- • , A!..7.------12511----1 v • . ,..„„.....'",_L. ........7............% //, ' II) fi. si,A14°54.,A I, • i ..,c, . .• * . 11)1'Ectst lane Trott %, R LS NO 27-ei- e' ....e I " • `■ sr) • e.s 1.1 .....- - -,-- 16.,- - t'a tol \ .1 I. I 1 6:24°1920 ' L s 21.23 - i‘ ....Stec/7'09u .,_ ...- 4) t < 43 4, Al • - _ ' %...N . Jr:gb‘• 6,• ,‘ • -.7- . 1 . • ic tt k01 1 i • ...\ \ *la L . • il) au kii ‘01 1 4 1040 21'7o' \ \ i z II IfP. C) . , vs. \• 0., CP / jr\ / \ • / '`' o •- --s, a \ VS. - 40 tic . . t N 0 al 2 el 1 a. EP' / • .• I.. & 10 11) i lbi I 0) 1 % I • ■' ‘ li , ace F ,• / ,Ail, , copy ‘C ci• M. t.\ i t 0 - CO d Lid,' 0* , 3 a.. vviffillti - \ Ai t it ,,.......„---- 01;e a I • /4 V' ' • 4171- ir4/ . ..._„3,.. • 41.. \ __ ____- , :. \--......z9 ).. lito ..1. t ,t . *: : ....- •• i • 01**** • #1,. . 1 m r• . tt't(-----iii.36 -•.--.. g_,--:id_ ■ + - ti; i- ; 0\ ry.--3..... .... - . . rreeweA, N ,40 p'OONW 171.5.7_.., in V464 r'Ct•‘ i .4°, .'"P - • / ,, :›. t. ".!, gi•44: ,, , ,f, a B in ..1------ u;\ / . #4- •J. r e ..", r 1_-----II- ''''-1 • 1 rr . ,,, - 0,; • t . . , , _iv -, ,„ :„ ",:„ .,4. ,,\ , 4.. #.7, e z.; 0:4,, A; % \ .0•0•''''' 40 !a\ 01°4"r 'Mow 1, 7..■ ..% ,.. 0\ ,,, • 4 4%) l :b4,..-- j:' r eArserr - sor rer •#, Vic . - 1 IV' r Aw/-, i; " e re.41,4,4 00• _ 2- 111i AY k' • CD71)- 11) IA 11 . #.:. . A , 4 , 0,, . '‘Dcsz 0 \ ' II ' ••• \ k Fri/ eV/ .,.., Ilo•Vrt . % \ • ...- •Ic ,, 0,11• s21 . e•e;.„ . -• / __.....-••-$ ...,"\ .■''' ./<0''....'. . e e.7/4,‘ e, el.. t/ „.„.....- ‘ „„.. ,e,• \„..... ...."• P :Air '1 I4 1/sl,I /rook'. -I 1 \ *7 ir ..." N „ "'2.5 V:6 oiror.. ee __, eiee A , .....- . ' s ....7, \ "To,. e e. Ks 39.49d --k-- . 2, .0. In.rzs'se ■ . ■ \..„, ( • ea " \ ' $7, ' ,,; lir •tf,: ,.4.-N......14 b 4 • .1. \ -,/--;;ZZ, ' .taZ,;:v \a +// P. i 1 ■ 1 al we \ ....,‘ eiss,r,r•..45, t -A ...i... --A - / ---,.. ••i "...peer, nye,,• . .f . 1 • .. . veioseeeeoalgeoi.o. e.eeeee.. \ v," •I- -1 ..i , • \VZSI;30;;", , - ' : 7 / ,o/ t*„7.-. 4, -‘ ;.,,z., #404,d, f 1 j ..i . . son _.••• lw ••• t - .: .....1 ■••••‘ r 1Z., fi ........... ‘ "•• 0 ,-.1.. •0000.0‘ ‘ 1:-..a. ‘ • il t, 0 ••• •• SS• ' 4.t...- 73 .17/ - ./ • • ..\1/4 :r ' ;14; W--; eli.e. ,e„."• ;„....; 'Now#-.. ...7 ......„,, •eie, eee •.=,,t , ,- ,:,,A.,. ...........0 , , `.: 'R, ee-----...foe. • err ,.:-,,, .,. , • , rereiroorf,eie . rro.seeiy •. , 400 00 .....40.24LO• 17,1 .. ...f4 / ,a . ....-......,.,s4 . .8. .-A-r •.00 / -0 .,1 i../' / ..; -. is •-......, .... la ...- . ii i% - - - -,-. - ..., - f .•_% t 1 ..,,, At •e • . .--- / . . .. , I _./. >Ts i :6.1: • •. +. 4) • : 71 i 01. - . .... , ■ It 1 - ... .•••••: ot ..*; / 1 I 1 -. ,.- :. ..• I 1 1 ....7-. . • . - -- - - A / VA. c . / 'ra ! • •iii: • ....v. •... i I 1 . i 12°-.31',64 - ii *ix 1 .,/ l a-. : .: • 1.., fir, • :...-. ....- ii i 1 . AO, y : ...i • .. ?I ik *--• . . . 1 I L.. 9• '• s2n°31.42"E 11 - . ' 4ra • 1 k 1 le lit 25.24 -. ...,„, - I■1 i lc) 10; ■ 1 . 04 - 424re N. ..' - ' *1 1 /0"i I*.111. *III a t 4101°A .N1 i II • " * •tit".. , '... t 41 i kl 1 Ii 41 1 ...- - 00"."•......../ i , %%A.m. • 3?.Os L I i 1 r� �, k 1 1 .. .. ii\ , \ = 1 A\•111 )i-1 Ifi 1 1 l 1 ' y r `� ' -- _.°.. ___ ,> _V r, \II. 1 1 1': ; tr 0 ' a„~ co 1' cv m\ ■ t� \ Q=2°51 09 " \c� cv\ 6 3/ O9 a L=20.45 1 V a 1'f Y' tqg+ -�1 1 1'+� 0 1 34 \ 9 , .,,I:t 1■ ,te'-' ,.`, ":'1`,'„ I \I 1 h 1 z 2'J 1, , ,� 411 41'1'4 },.h c„ \ 1 m 4=4°U'0(° 1 2 00 • 0 5 59 N_ 6 s 1,' a to ►r_ L=30.00 1 1 -1* L-9 N 12 3 w o \ A 11i ) ;if� .1 '� N °op N ■ I oA9Q8 �, r �6� 5? r �,N o 0,\ °Q�y3 L, ��- My4t ,, 1 1 L a WA fl 6 . ' 4 fpxs :1�° z1 `a=7°06'26„ � ! IV ya! j3319, O N {, N \ NZ' j i 1;'1'' ' 1 I y,.r� L-24.8/ `�� 1 �; \ \ - ° iii--'`lajil�, f;i 1 ■1 i� • FI 5$3858 • 720 \ \� 1, a I , X 80 ,- R 12 r- r- 13 L= 3949 \-- • Lr- <� � �i I . , ;cli X31 D,�9,. 5' g)IZ �,g0 -a� 1 d=3°25'58 \ \ ■:' I 1` • 2°'L?1.--.12 014 32- " l0 00 \ \ • a•t; ��Qp ,5,�g0 -„N.3 p=1 11,)11u1 \m m y ;i d=2A°38 53+ 81 • '� \ 1 1 10 \,-�_ .° • ?_ 1`, \0' 1 to m` ,+ „ 1 \us N L - 111',.---'--- ':S\. 0,'' . \\0, \ 0 \ U C3_ „ 1.1 �.. \sue -29 0 . � 4=5 33'26' \ 4 1^_ �10 5 •30' �, F6,0 (5.• \225.0 \<'• L.35.00 \\ \ \ � 1 r —7 N Ig° 8,= --\ \ . C'�. ��'i ro -• 32 00 \ -. Lfi i , °'c ` s� • p'ZOo37 35i dL3 f7 3,0„ \\ \\ \�>20 IIIC ! , f�5g5�� O \,, -, 1 . <00°lib a C I (,1A 6 \ 1 o , w , , -,.... - \— \ 6; N 1 1 \ I .,,, ///,/r,/, r.:C ' \ °31'A.- V-c <, M 1 I 1 / ,,, ,//,,,/,.,, Y/ �0- 1 L0, . ' • /.,/,77/// r.. 11 `n / /iii./ ✓///,.,/./,.,.,. ,./ 11 17g.9`' .5,- „; •lI f1 — .o / .,.,//.. �{Y/,,,/.,,,//,/, ,.r \. `''� 1 Z `( ////,/.,,r,. , VV/ ,,,,r, „• \ I 7 h/��` /,///7//////// �..� V�t,,,,,,,,rv, //„ ,,.,///,.////, /„ /,/r,,,,,,.,/, /, U /e,,,/.e,//„/,//„/.,,, (b. - /17/,/7',,-, 425 \\ /.,.Cv,r , b5.,,,. ti I 00 12a _.J 430 " ;;,,/S �° \ Match Line C 1;: �. 10 ly 14 ig �� O ( See sheet 2 of 4 sheets ) throM k. 11. gi (See chest 4 of 1 sheets) . . - - _ _. I. ckt V261 , • •?sue . 1.1.� ��42. I ■ v PI' 20 �� ti -jag35R'590.09 NOO_34'29� l"�°' 7 ```� ' . r : �.."c:44 3 DR/VE _ ;N A29-- .�� N I� •=l•0543.v� ,– 6 Le.86.49 . I 4 '41 - 1.76 — , • NO5•3/'OS"E ��g ` • , I '1 j�_ 4995 i ; d_ , 0 — �� i I �,S�C� 120 I 4' _. 8 %At‘ 0,/ _A../ _ , ,..., , i_ l� a ,•. . 5� i J = I 1 O T g. ' , o Nol_o2's8 w /66s� :r: �� , of 1 ., ` 55 — — \ / i � :71' -""% ``A. / �I • off- ` / \ 5 o _ �( ;gym• //2.58 I L Z��♦��lla e%� 3 OD 95.00 __I \s �air\�� " f --- --- ....... . .?me.;rt.,.,%..‘ v.%zza ZZZ:Z. R ;:::\-- - - .7i rt--- '24P1r)(' ill # r ,, .■-,1.7)' .� II: a flo -4 J1a ` QZI�. / io co 1 I 3 I j ,/ ) so2°seb8"W I • •• - • I 1- � . A / r 7/�3— I N ts- X 33 �ti�Iv �; . I 1P/5.00 ) 1 = 20 11 rt v1 3 lit. '( k L=68.00 s.,. : . • • I �E 1 \0 1 _ _ • •� ' z �y 0i ' 32.00 •1°00'00" 1 L- — N°6.55'04"E I 'l° a°��°° I x.00 174.38 I '0 �4 R' 1O r ~ , J L No0_38'04�'E 15468 v (' i O in t.79 — 1 J��d=5!•33'58" k �+ �� L=4500 l — — —_ "Z �i +• �1 o` - •-'� O �� NOO°S4 P9 I I/ 1 C W a1 65.00 1/ 4=68027'12" �� o �� ' 1=65.7/ \ aI* m 1:O 1 1 ,I `. V ylh h II ' CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN S5317 (612) 937-1900 1 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLI CANT: I i°yQ7i A FIYAVV0bd OWNER: Si F1'1P ADDRESS: el- 1 D HUY ADDRESS: SQ flIQ_� 1 TELEPHONE (Day time) F TELEPHONE: 1-1-710 - 12P REQUEST 1 ♦ Conditional Use Permit - $150 ♦ Subdivision: 1 ♦ Interim Use Permit - $150 Preliminary Plat: 1 Land Use Plan Amendment - $100 - Sketch Plan - $200 1 ♦ Planned Unit Development: - Create less than 3 lots - $100 - Sketch Plan - $200 - Create more than 3 lots - 1 $100 + $15 acre + $5 per lot - Preliminary Development Plan lot created $300 + $15 acre ' - Final Development Plan - $200 - Final Plat - $100 - Metes and Bounds - $100 - Amendment to Final Development :1 Plan - $300 + $15 acre - Consolidate Lots - $100 TOTAL PUD TOTAL SUBDIVISION II ♦ Site Plan Review - $150 u/ ♦ Wetland Alteration Permit: 1 - Individual Single Family ♦ Vacation of Utility or Lots $25 Street Easement - $100 _ - All Others - $150 1 ♦ Variance - $75 ♦ Rezoning - $250 I ♦ Zoning Appeal - $75 ♦ Zoning Ordinance Amendment - No Charge 1 RLcE►v Lu JUN 27 1990 CITY_OF CHANHASSEN * NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. 1 PROJECT NAME I LOCATION • VLEGAL DESCRIPTION Iof- 4 � bloom 2 Cur v Ft)1(nlf PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION REASON FOR THIS REQUEST This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. ' This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name , and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or ' purchase agreement) , or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and ' the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents ' and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. TAM no ruvk 1 7r)Ic tD Signature of applicant Date ' `To)\ Qty 251ci i) Signature of Fee Owner Date ' Application Received on G a 9-9O Fee Paid es a J Receipt No. 31 (NO This application will be considered by the Planning Commission/Board of !' Adjustments and Appeals on I WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT EVALUATION WORKSHEET To Be Completed By Applicant and Submitted with Application (Attach additional sheets if necessary) 1. WETLAND DESCRIPTION: ' Size: 03Io acres Class: B Type: hoc!'nr3 Pprhd Location: Lakeside Streamside _ Upland Watershed District: Area of Open Water: .fib Ci , (J Q,) ' Drainage Flows To: 20.e nt'u LU,y +D. ChY1.1tmaS l C�.lCSQ Vegetation Types: Cad--l-tk. Soil Types: 11 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ALTERATION: K r \DVee. -70 cep-- oC_ Cat�zQrD 3. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED ALTERATION: S0.-c2{-U • 4. APPLICABLE WETLAND ORDINANCE SECTION: 5. A. DISCUSS THE IMPACTS ON TEE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IF MO ' ALTERATION IS MADE: - ho WA IOIli bLC gm/_ n«r . [IcrZ arri A A!All l . L 1 I 5. B. IDENTIFY AND DISCUSS OTHER -ALTERNATIVES TO WETLAND I ALTERATION: Mulca FO h( u)Url (ife C. IDENTIFY THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF THE PROPOSED ALTERATION: .re-- on h.Pat0-iF;rcthv.)-Y-) 1 1 6 . USING THE WETLAND ORDINANCE STANDARDS AS A GUIDE, DETERMINE WHETHER THERE ARE ANY INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN THE ORDINANCE AND PROPOSED ALTERATION: • 1° . .:. .ter aka .�.s � � ; O11Q kP�tY i c 5Y-G . 1 • 1 . 1 - i 1 1 1 1 -2- 1 . . - ----., .:-'-... . I, .. • , „. ... . . .. I ; . • I 'i ' ). - i • f • v i - , I :' :-- k, •..,i.;.. •1.;-,•-:,. ' it ! r /I 1, . i , 1 .. i !: : ,■ i ..2,:. 1 1 ii I I 'V • • - _____________ 't ' Ii I (1 1, . i:t I --i : ;= . , r . i ; et"- ( e i ...) • : ;i I ; I • 1, f • ....4., ...., 'I.--1 - 1, I - - i I r rf\ %. c, ` I c+) I r N r. • " ' i . . ' .. I I . .-, r c _1 ,..... I : i .,r , - • A(1 ( , N I fr '''' -I) I . . •• i I; _ -.. I . - - i I , . 1 , It i ! , i I t t , , . - 3 . A - . r-r■ 1- • t ; : • t . I: . , . • ; i c's "--.:. ', ---: I — ' —17-n -- .- - .._-,..._ r.. ...1 z ....C-°-- bd. i7i () h ..., -10 V - r, ., ‘ - A i 1 i' ' r •1 D.. .1 4-.--CD -61 ' , p X F _ I r -.. i i 1. 1 ± e— 0 4_0 I . 0:2 I . ,,..... A-cs ; 61 I., 1 ...... , . , t " • 1 : ' \\ ,\ . cis ,E. 7---4 . 1 .., §% el- \... I ; , :. / \ ': \ ‘ .. • .... . _. _... , _...- I ._ -...„ _. ,.-------- 1 ---... ., . _ ; , -4z....- --- . ./ 0 "..g --------_______________, • . I I - I CITY OF CHANHASSEN �. 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 1 el f\ REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: ,J�; C Clf\ �f n►f1 OWNER: vy\'C. , l` n' 1 i ADDRESS: p L U EC r Tbn t el ADDRESS: TELEPHONE (Day time) 14 70- /5qc) TELEPHONE: 613 7-7-2 9 9 I REQUEST • Conditional Use Permit - $150 • Subdivision: ' • Interim Use Permit - $150 Preliminary Plat: • Land Use Plan Amendment - $100 - Sketch Plan - $200 • Planned Unit Development: - Create less than 3 lots - $100 I - Sketch Plan - $200 - Create more than 3 lots - $100 acre + $5 per lot - Preliminary Development Plan lot cr created $300 + $15 acre - Final Plat - $100 - Final Development Plan - $200 - Metes and Bounds - $100 - Amendment to Final Development Plan - $300 + $15 acre - Consolidate Lots - $100 TOTAL PUD TOTAL SUBDIVISION • Site Plan Review - $150 ♦ Wetland Alteration Permit: ' - Individual Single Family • Vacation of Utility or Lots - $25 Street Easement - $100 - All Others - $150 • Variance - $75 • Rezoning - $250 • Zoning Appeal - $75 • Zoning Ordinance Amendment - I No Charge * NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall I be charged for each application. I 1 - CITY OF 1 s\ CHANHASSEN • : , , • 1 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 W2) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 1 November 17, 1989 1 Dear Resident: Attached please find a copy of the City' s Wetland Ordinance, 1 definition of a Class A and Class B wetland and a description of Type 1-8 wetlands. The City Wetland Ordinance protects Types 2-8 wetlands. Class A wetlands are Types 3-8 and Class B 1 wetlands are Type 2. The City' s Wetland Ordinance prohibits certain activities within the wetlands and allows other activities if a wetland alteration ' permit is received. The Wetland Ordinance was adopted by the City in the fall of 1984. As part of the ordinance adoption, a wetland map was drafted which designated wetland areas in 1 Chanhassen. The wetland map does not show all wetlands protected in Chanhassen. Specifically, the City inspects sites with repre- sentatives from Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of Natural Resources and Corps of Engineers to determine if a wetland 1 exists, what type it is and of what quality. The City' s Wetland Ordinance is the most restrictive protection 1 of wetlands in a line of several governing agencies, including the DNR, Fish and Wildlife and Corps of Engineers. For example, if the DNR does not protect a wetland, this does not mean that 1 Chanhassen does not protect the wetland. If there is a question whether a wetland exists on a property and what can occur within the wetland, the City should be the first agency contacted. The City will act as the liaison between the property owner and all 1 other affected agencies. If you have any further questions about wetlands and Chanhassen' s Wetland Ordinance, please feel free to call Paul Krauss or myself at 937-1900. 1 Sincerely, Jo Ann Olsen 1 Senior Planner cc: City Council 1 Planning Commission Don Ashworth Engineering Dept. 11 Building Dept. I §20-1 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE the deck line of a mansard roof, or to the average height between the eaves and ridge of a gable,hip or gambrel roof. Building, principal means a building in which is conducted the primary or predominant I use of the lot. Building setback line means a line on a lot, generally parallel to a lot line, high water I mark, shoreline or road right-of-way line, located a sufficient distance therefrom to provide the minimum yards required by this chapter. The building setback lines delimit the area in which buildings and other regulated structures are permitted subject to all applicable provi- ' sions of this chapter. Church means a building or edifice consecrated to religious worship, where people join together in some form of public worship under the aegis and direction of a person who is I authorized under the laws of the State of Minnesota to solemnize marriages. A church may include living quarters for persons employed on the premises and classroom facilities. The following are not considered as churches: Camp meeting grounds, aiikvahs, coffee houses, I recreational complexes, retreat houses, sleeping quarters for retreatants during spiritual retreats extending for periods of more than one (1) day. Bible camps with live-in quarters, publishing establishments, ritual slaughter houses, radio or television towers and transmis- sion facilities,theological seminaries,day care centers,hospitals,and drug treatment centers are not churches. Class A wetlands means wetland types 3,4,5,6,7 and 8.In the case of wetlands adjoining a public waters designated as lake or pond this class shall also include type 2 wetlands.Type 2 wetlands shall also be deemed a class A wetland when adjoining a stream designated as public I waters to the extent that it encroaches upon the one-hundred-year floodplain of the stream. Class B wetlands means type 2 wetlands not adjoining a public waters designated as lake or pond nor within the one-hundred-year floodplain of a stream designed as public waters. Clear-cutting means the removal of an entire stand of trees. Collector street means a street that carries traffic from minor streets to arterial streets. I Conference/convention center means a preplanned, centrally managed development con- , taining facilities for business or professional conferences and seminars and containing ac- , commodations for overnight lodging,eating and recreation.The development is characterized by architecturally integrated buildings, common use of parking areas, and incorporation of passes recreational amenities into overall site design. I Conforming building or structure means any building or structure which complies with all the regulations of this chapter,or any amendment thereto. Contractor's yard means any area or use of land where vehicles, equipment, and/or I construction materials and supplies commonly used by building, excavation, roadway con- struction, landscaping and similar contractors are stored or serviced. A contractor's yard I includes both areas of outdoor storage and areas confined within a completely enclosed building used in conjunction with a contractor's business. titSapp No.1 1144 I .1 . J , ZONING § 20.1 • I (2) Creating cemetery lots; (3) Resulting from court orders, or the adjustment of a lot line by the relocation of a Icommon boundary. Temporary structure means a structure without any foundation or footings and which shall be removed when the designed time period, activity, or use for which temporary struc- ILure was erected has ceased. Townhouse means a single-family attached dwelling in a row of at least three (3) such I units in which each unit has its own front and rear access to the outside, no unit is located over another unit and each unit is separated from the adjoining unit by one (1) or more common fire resistent walls having no openings and extending from the basement to the roof. ITrailer, temporary means a trailer or mobile home for construction purposes,the display or sale of real estate,or major durable goods or as a temporary form of residential dwelling on Ilot on which a house is being constructed. _ Trailer, travel means a vehicle or movable structure which is designed, intended or used for temporary human habitation during recreational or vacation activities.The term includes, Iwithiout limitation, recreational vehicles, campers, camper trailers and tents, and house .travel and tent trailers,but does not include mobile homes. C I . Truck terminal means any use,area,or building where cargo,trucks,truck parts,loading equipment, and the like is stored or where trucks load and unload on a regular basis. I Utility services means the erection, construction, alteration, or maintenance, by public utilities or municipal or other governmental agencies, of underground or overhead gas, electrical, steam or water transmission or distribution systems, communication, including 1 poles, wire, mains, drains, sewers, pipe, conduits, cables, fire alarm boxes, police call boxes, traffic signals, hydrants, and other similar equipment and accessories in connection there- with, that is reasonably necessary for the furnishing of adequate service by such public I utilities or governmental agencies or for the public health or safety or general welfare. This term does not imply overhead transmission lines in excees of sixty-nine(69)kv. I Variance means permission to depart from the requirements of this chapter. Vehicular use area(V.U.A.)means any open or unenclosed area containing more than one thousand eight hundred(1,800)square feet of area and/or used by six(6)or more,of any type Iof vehicle,whether moving or at rest, including, but not limited to,parking lots, loading and unloading areas, and sales and service areas. Driveways are considered to be vehicular use areas whenever they are adjacent to public streets or other vehicular use elements described I previously in this paragraph(and intervening curbs, sidewalks, landscape strips,etc.,do not eliminate adjacency). lir Warehousing means the commercial storage of merchandise and personal property. Wetland types means classifications of wetlands as defined in U.S.Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service,Circular 39, "Wetlands of the U.S. 19.56". I Supp.No. 1 1155 1. §20-1 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE 46. Wetland watershed means that area of land from which water drains into a class A or class B wetland. Wholesale nursery means an enterprise which conducts the wholesale of plants grown on site as well as accessory items directly related to their care and maintenance (but not including power equipment such as gas or engine lawnmowers and farm implements). Wholesale trade means an establishment or place of business primarily engaged in selling merchandise to retailers; to industrial, commercial, institutional, or professional business users, or to other wholesalers; or acting as agents or brokers and buying merchandise for, or selling merchandise to such individuals or companies. Wind energy conversion system or(WECS) means any device that is designed to convert wind power to another form of energy such as electricity or heat (also referred to by such common names as wind charger,wind turbine and windmill). Yard means any open space that lies between the principal or accessory building or buildings and the nearest lot line. Such yard is unoccupied and unobstructed from the ground upward except as may be specifically provided in this chapter. Yard, front means a yard extending across the full width of the lot between any building and the front lot line,and measured perpendicular to the building from the closest point of the building to the front lot line. Yard, rear means a yard extending across the full width of the lot between the principal building and the rear lot line, and measured perpendicular to the building from the closest point of the building to the rear lot line. Yard, side means a yard extending from the front yard to the rear yard between the principal building and the side lot line, measured perpendicular to the building from the ' closest point of the building to the side lot line. Zoning administrator means the city manager. (Ord.No.80,Art.II, § 1,12-15-86;Ord.No.80-A, § 1,6-15-87;Ord.No.80-G, §2,1-11-88;Ord. No.98, § 1, 11-28-88) Sec. 20.2. Purpose. ' This chapter is enacted to carry out the intent of the city's comprehensive plan and to: (1) Protect residential,commercial,industrial and institutional areas from the intrusion of incompatible uses; (2) Prevent overcrowding of land; , (3) Conserve and enhance the city's tax base; (4) Protect against fire,smoke,explosion,noxious fumes,offensive noise,vibration,dust, odors,heat,glare and other hazards to people; (5) Preserve the natural beauty and amenities of the city and achieve excellence and originality of design; Supp.No. 1 1156 , I IcZONING § 20401 (3) Nonresidential structures. Commercial, manufacturing and industrial structures shall ordinarily be elevated on fill so that their first floor(including basement)is above the regulatory flood protection elevation but may in special circumstances be flood-proofed in accordance with the state building code. Structures that are not elevated to above the regulatory flood protection elevation shall be flood-proofed to FP-1 or FP-2 classi- fication as defined by the Uniform Building Code as adopted and amended by the city. Structures flood-proofed to FP-3 or FP-4 classification shall not be permitted. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 21(5-21-2), 12-15-86) ' Cross reference—Technical codes, § 7-16-et seq. State law reference—Condfitional uses,M.S. § 462.3595. Sec. 20-378. Residential uses. ' Residences that do not have vehicular access at or above an elevation not more than two (2)feet below the regulatory flood protection elevation shall not be permitted unless granted a variance. In granting a variance the city shall specify limitations on the period of use or occupancy of the residence. (Ord. No. 80,Art. V, § 21(5-21-3(1)), 12-15-86) ' Sec. 20-379. Commercial uses. Accessory land uses, such as yards, railroad tracks and parking lots may be at elevations lower than the regulatory flood protection elevation. However, a permit for such facilities to be used by the employees or the general public shall not be granted in the absence of a flood t. warning system that provides adequate time for evacuation if the area would innundate to a depth greater than two (2) feet or be subject to flood velocities greater than four (4) feet per second upon occurrence of the regional flood. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 21(5-21-3(2)), 12-15-86) ' Sec. 20-380. Manufacturing and industrial uses. Measures shall be taken to minimize interference with normal plant operations espe- cially along streams having protracted flood durations. Certain accessory land uses such as yards and parking lots may be at lower elevations subject to requirements set forth above. In considering permit applications, due consideration shall be given to needs of an industry ' whose business requires that it be located in flood plain areas. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 21(5-21-3(3)), 12-15-86) Secs. 20-381-20-400. Reserved. ARTICLE VI. WETLAND PROTECTION DIVISION 1. GENERALLY !h. Sec. 20-401. Findings and intent. Wetlands are a valuable resource. Wetlands help maintain water quality, serve to mini- mize problems with flooding and erosion, serve as sources of food and habitat for a variety of 1187 I I §20-401 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE • fish and wildlife and are an integral part of the community's natural landscape providing the aesthetic benefits of open space and a natural separation of land uses. It is the intent of this article to establish a program of sound stewardship through regulations that strive toward I zero degradation of the wetlands by conserving, protecting and enhancing these environmen- tally sensitive resources. (Ord.No.80,Art.V, § 24(5-24-1), 12-15-86) I Sec. 20402. Purpose. The purpose of this article is to assure the protection of the general health, safety and welfare of the residents and the protection of the wetland resources of the city,for now and in the future, through preservation and conservation of wetlands and sound management of development by: (1) Establishment of wetland regulations. (2) Requiring proper erosion control practices. (3) Requiring sound management practices that will protect, conserve, maintain, en- 'I hance and improve the present quality of wetlands within the community. ' (4) Requiring improved water quality in streams and lakes with its attendant increase in recreational use and value. (5) Protecting and enhancing the scenic value of the community. 1 (6) Restricting and controlling the harmful effects of land development which adversely 111 affect wetlands. (7) Reducing the need for piped storm water improvements. (8) Preventing rapid runoff from developed areas. (9) Preventing pollution from gas, oil, salt, fertilizer, sand and silt. (10) Allowing only development that is compatible with wetland protection and enhancement. (11) Providing standards for the alteration of wetlands. (12) Controlling development outside of the wetland areas that may be detrimental to 1 wetlands. (13) Prohibiting dumping of waste in wetlands. (14) Restricting the placement of structures within wetland areas. (15) Drawing attention to the function of wetlands and the impact of urbanization upon wetlands. (Ord. No.80,Art. V, § 24(5-24-2), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-403. Interpretation. Neither the issuance of a wetland alteration permit nor compliance with the conditions thereof, nor compliance with the provisions of this chapter shall relieve any person from any 1188 I . , ZONING § 20-407 Iresponsibility otherwise imposed by law for damage to persons or property; nor shall the issuance of any permit serve to impose any liability on the city or its officers or employees for injury or damage to persons or property. I (Ord. No.80. Art. V, § 24(5-24-12), 12-15-86) I Sec. 20-404. Establishment of wetland areas. I Lands lying within a wetland area shall be subject to the requirements established herein, as well as restrictions and requirements established by other applicable city ordinan- Ices and regulations. The Wetland Protection Regulation shall not be construed to allow anything otherwise prohibited in the zoning district where the wetland area is located. The wetland map, entitled "Chanhassen Wetland Map"dated May 22, 1984 is hereby adopted as Iprima facie evidence of the wetland areas and an official copy is on file in the office of the city clerk. Land within the wetland areas shall be classified as class A wetland or class B wetland as delineated on the map. I (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 24(5-24-3), 12-15-86) _ ;--- Sec. 20-405. Determination of wetland area. I ' \ An applicant for development which may be in a wetland area shall bring this to the city's attention. If required by the city, the applicant shall provide appropriate technical C information, including but not limited to, topographical survey and soil data deemed neces- j sary for the city to determine the exact wetland boundary. The city council may exempt land .7 t from the wetland regulations if it finds that the land is not in fact a wetland. The city council shall make necessary interpretations concerning the wetland area based upon the wetland map. the definition of wetlands and the intent and purpose of this article. i (Ord. No. 30,Art. V, § 24(5-24-2), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-406. Variances. I The city council may grant a variance from the requirements of this article. In addition,a variance may be granted based upon mitigative measures proposed by the applicant to recreate, to an equal or greater degree, the environmental and hydrological function of the I wetland area that is proposed to be altered. (Ord. No. 80,Art. V, § 24(5-24.14), 12-15-86) I i 1 Sec. 20-407. Prohibited uses in class A wetlands. The following uses are prohibited in class A wetlands: t I (1) Disposal of waste material including, but not limited to. sewage, demolition debris, jhazardous and toxic substances,and all waste that would normally be disposed of at a i solid waste disposal site or into a sewage disposal system or sanitary sewer. I (2) Solid waste disposal sites, sludge ash disposal sites, hazardous waste transfer or lil'-- . disposal sites. (3) Septic or soil absorption systems. Supp.No. 1 1189 I I § 20-407 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE I (4) Sedimentation basins for construction projects. CI (5) Open storage. (6) Animal feedlots. - I (7) The planting of any species of the genus Lythrurn. 1 (8) Operation of motorized craft of all sizes and classifications. (Ord. No. 80,Art. V, § 24(5-24-5), 12-15-86) I Sec. 20-408. Prohibited uses in class B wetlands. I The following uses are prohibited in class B wetlands: (1) Disposal of waste material including, but not limited to. sewage, demolition debris. 1 hazardous and toxic substances, and all waste that would normally be disposed of at a solid waste disposal site or into a sewage disposal system or sanitary sewer. (2) Solid waste disposal sites, sludge ash disposal sites, hazardous waste transfer or I disposal sites. (3) Animal feedlots. CI (4) The planting of any species of the genus Lythrum. I (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 24(5-24-6), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-409. General development regulations. I Within wetland areas and for lands abutting or adjacent to a horizontal distance of two hundred(200)feet, the following minimum provisions are applicable: I (I) The minimum lot area is fifteen thousand(15,000)square feet. (2) The minimum structure setback is seventy-five(75)feet from the ordinary high water 1 mark. (3) Septic and soil absorption system setbacks are one hundred fifty (150) feet from I ordinary high water mark. (4) The lowest ground floor elevation is three(3)feet above ordinary high water mark. I (5) No development shall be allowed which may result in unusual road maintenance costs or utility line breakages due to soil limitation, including high frost.action. I (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 24(5-24-13), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 80-C, § 1, 10-5-87) Secs. 20-410-20-420. Reserved. t'll Supp.No. 1 1190 I 1 . , ICZONING § 20-422 :N.DIVISION 2. WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT IPart A. General Provisions Sec. 20-421. Required. IThe following activities are prohibited in the wetland area indicated unless the city council issues a wetland alteration permit allowing the activity: I (1) Scientific research projects in a class A or class B wetland which alter the wetland. (2) Public works in a class A or class B wetland except for emergency public works which shall not require a wetland alteration permit. I (3) Creation of ponds or dams and alterations of the natural drainageways or water courses of a class A or class B wetland. ' I (4) Removal from class A wetland of trees or vegetation except hay, crops and diseased and storm damaged trees and vegetation which shall not require a wetland alteration permit. I (5) Docks, walkways and boardwalks, within class A or B wetland. C. (6) Installing or replacing drain tile or ditches in a class A wetland. Repairing existing drain tile, in a class A wetland if the property has not been in active agricultural use C. during the twelve(12)months preceding February 19, 1987. 1 '' I (7) Development in any class A wetland or within two hundred (200) feet of a class A wetland that is within the wetland's watershed. (8) Septic or soil absorption systems in a class B wetland. I (9) Sedimentation basins in a class B wetland. I (10) Any structure in a class A or B wetland except for minor expansion and additions to single-family detached dwellings existing February 19, 1987 that do not require a wetland alteration permit. I (11) Digging, dredging, filling, or in any other way altering a class A or B wetland, including,but not limited to,such wetlands in public waters lying wholly within the city. I (12) Advertising signs in a class A or B wetland. (Ord. No. 80,Art.V, § 24(5-24-7), 12-15-88; Ord. No. 98, § 2, 11-28-88) ISec. 20-422. Application,issuance,etc. I The applicant for :a wetland alteration permit shall furnish the information required by the city including but not limited to, a site plan, topographic data and hydrological data for IF the review of a wetland alteration permit application. A wetland alteration permit shall not be issued without having been first reviewed by the planning commission and approved by the Supp. No. L 1191 t § 20-422 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE council foIlowing the review procedures set forth for conditional use permits. The applicant shall have the burden of proving that the proposed use or activity complies with the purposes, intent and other provisions of this article. A permit must be approved by a three-fifths vote of the council.The council may establish reasonable conditions which are specifically set forth in the permit to ensure compliance with requirements contained in this article. Such conditions may,among other matters, limit the size, kind or character of the proposed work, require the construction of other structures, require replacement of vegetation, establish required moni- toring procedures and maintenance activity, stage the work over time, require the alteration of the site design to ensure buffering, require the provision of a performance security. The granting of a wetland alteration permit does not abrogate the need to obtain permits required by other local,state or federal agencies. (Ord.No.80,Art. V, § 24(5-24-9), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-423. Inspection of work. The city engineer may cause inspection of work for which a wetland alteration permit is issued to be made periodically during the course of such work and shall cause final inspection to be made following the completion of the work. (Ord. No. 80,Art. V, § 24(5-24-11), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-424. Expiration,renewal,etc. I (a) Unless otherwise specified by the city council, the person issued a wetland alteration permit shall begin and complete the development authorized by the permit within une 1)year after the date the council approves the permit application. (b) The permittee shall provide written notice to the city engineer twenty-four(24)hours prior to the commencement and completion of the development project. No project shall be , deemed to have been completed until approved by the city engineer after receipt of notice of completion. (c) If the permittee fails to commence work on the development within the time specified in this section, the permit shall be void. The council may renew a void permit at its discretion. If the council does not renew the permit, the holder of the void permit may make original application for a new permit. (d) The permittee may make written application to the council for an extension of the time to commence work, but only if the permittee submits the application prior to the date already established to commence work. The application for an extension shall state the reasons the permittee requires an extension. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 24(5-24-10), 12-15.86) Secs. 20-425-20-435. Reserved. Supp. No. 1 1192 I . . ZONING § 20-436 ' Part B. Issuance Guidelines Sec. 20-436. Generally. ' No wetland alteration permit shall be issued unless the council determines that the proposed development complies with the provisions of this part, as well as the intent and C rj .1 1 ' Supp. No. 1 1192.1 t ZONING § 20-438 purpose of this article. In reviewing wetland alteration proposals reference shall be made to United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service under Runoff, Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook and Technical Field Guide. If the city council determines that the required calculations in a particular instance are needlessly burdensome because of the area and nature of a proposal, it may agree to a substitute analysis. (Ord. No. 80,Art.V, § 24(5-24-8), 12-15-86) , Sec. 20-437. Filling. A minimum amount of filling will be allowed when necessary for the use of property,but only when it will not have a net adverse effect upon the ecological and hydrological character- istics of the wetland.In determining whether a proposed development will have a net adverse effect on the ecological and hydrological characteristics of the wetland, the council shall consider,but not limit its consideration to, the following factors: (1) Any filling shall not cause total natural flood storage capacity of the wetland to fall ' below, or fall below further, the projected volume of run-off from the watershed generated by a 5.9-inch rainfall in twenty-four(24) hours. Since the total amount of filling which can be permitted is limited,apportionment of fill opportunities for other properties abutting the wetland shall be considered. (2) Any filling shall not cause total natural nutrient stripping capacity of the wetland to be diminished to an extent that is deterimental to any area river, lake or stream. (3) Only fill free of chemical pollutants and organic wastes may be used. (4) Filling shall be carried out so as to minimize the impact on vegetation. (5) Filling in wetland areas will not be permitted during waterfowl breeding season or fish spawning season,unless it is determined by the city that the wetland is not used for waterfowl breeding or fish spawning. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5-24-8(1), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-438. Dredging. Dredging will be allowed only when it will not have a net adverse effect on the ecological ' and hyrological characteristics of the wetlands. Dredging, when allowed, shall be limited as follows: (1) It shall be located as to minimize the impact on vegetation. (2) It shall not adversely change water flow. (3) The size of the dredged area shall be limited to the minimum required for the ' proposed action. (4) Disposal of the dredged material is prohibited within the wetland district unless specifically authorized in the wetland alteration permit. (5) Disposal of any dredged material shall include proper erosion control and nutrient retention measures. 1193 I , 1 §20-438 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE • ' (6) Dredging in any wetland area is prohibited during waterfowl breeding season or fish spawning season, unless it is determined by the city that the wetland is not used for waterfowl breeding or fish spawning. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 24(5-24-8(2)), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-439. Discharges. (a) Soil loss from a construction site any part of which is in a wetland or within two hundred(200)feet of the wetland that is within the wetland watershed shall not exceed a rate of more than two(2)tons per acre per year. (b) Projected soil loss from a completed construction project shall not exceed one-half ton ' per year if any part of it is in a wetland or within two hundred(200)feet of a wetland that is within the wetland watershed. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 24(5-24-8(3)), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-440. Stormwater runoff. (a) A minimum increase in volume of stormwater runoff to a wetland from a development over the natural volume of runoff may be allowed when necessary for use of property but only ' when it will not have a net adverse effect upon the ecological and hydrological characteristics of the wetlands. In no case shall the restrictions on runoff set out below be exceeded.Since the total increase in runoff which can be permitted is limited, the council when considering ' permit applications shall consider, in addition to the following, apportionment of increased runoff opportunity to all wetland property within the surrounding wetland area. (b) Stormwater runoff from a development may be directed to the wetland only when free ' of debris and substantially free of chemical pollutants and silt, and only at rates which do not disturb vegetation or increase turbidity. Sheet flow and other overland drainage of runoff shall be encouraged. (c) The proposed action shall not cause stormwater runoff on the wetlands to take place at ' a rate which would materially exceed the natural rate. (d) The allowed total increased runoff, in combination with the total fill allowed,shall not cause total natural flood storage capacity of the wetland to fall below, or fall below further, ' the projected volume of runoff in the whole developed wetland watershed generated by a 5.9-inch rainfall in twenty-four(24)hours. (e) The allowed total increase in runoff, in combination with the total fill allowed, shall not cause total natural nutrient stripping capacity of the wetland to fall below, or fall below further, the projected nutrient production from the whole developed wetland watershed. (Ord. No. 80, Art.V, § 24(5-24-8(4)), 12-15-86) Secs. 20-441-20-475. Reserved. 1194 1 II. WETLAND CHARACTERISTICS • A. Wetland or Hydrophytic Vegetation Definition: "The sum total of macrophytic plant life that occurs in areas where the frequency and duration of inundation or soil saturation produce permanently or periodically saturated soils of sufficient duration to exert a controlling influence on the plant II species present" -- Corps. In short, hydrophytes are plants that grow in wet conditions, such as cattails and bulrushes. B. Hydric Soils Definition: "Soil that is saturated, flooded, or II ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions II that favor the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation" -- SCS. The Soil Conservation Services provides a list of hydric soils for your reference. If you do not know the name of the soil in the area in question, then see if the soil has any of these indicators: ' 1. Soil consists predominantly of decomposed plant materials (pests and mucks) 2. Soil has an 8-inch or more layer of decomposing plant material on surface 3. Soil color is bluish gray to gray, or dark and I dull, at 10 to 12 inches below surface 4. Soil is sandy and has layer of 3 inches or more of decomposing plant material at soil surface 5. Soil is sandy and has dark stains or dark streaks I of organic material in upper layer 3 to 12 inches below soil surface 6. Soil has odor of rotten eggs ' I 11 C. Wetland Hydrology Definition: "Hydrologic characteristics of areas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to the surface at some time during the growing season" -- Corps. ' The following indicators provide evidence of the periodic presence of flooding or soil saturation: 1. Standing or flowing water is observed on area for a period of time during the growing season 2. Soil is water-logged 3. Water marks are present on trees or other objects 4. Drift lines, which are small piles of debris ' oriented in the direction of water movement through an area, are present i' 5. Debris is lodged in trees or piled against other objects by water 6. Thin layers of sediments are deposited on leaves or other objects D. Corps' Criteria vs. Fish and Wildlife Service Criteria . The Corps requires that a positive wetland indication be present for each parameter (vegetation, soils, and hydrology) for an area to be classified a wetland. '' However, the Fish and Wildlife Service requires that a positive indicator of wetlands be present for any one of the three parameters. I III. WETLAND CLASSIFICATION/TYPE A. Old Fish and Wildlife Service Classification System (from Circular 39) Type 1: Seasonally flooded basins and flats. The soil is covered with water or is waterlogged during variable seasonal periods, but usually is dry during much of the growing season. This type is found both in upland depressions and in overflow bottom lands. Vegetation may include bottom-land hardwoods and some herbaceous growths such as cockleburs, ragweed, smartweed, and beggar ticks. ' Type 2: Inland fresh meadows. The soil usually is without standing water during most of the growing season but is waterlogged within a few inches of its surface. Vegetation may include sedges, rushes, and a variety of grasses. Type 3: inland shallow fresh marshes. The soil is usually waterlogged during the growing season. They are commonly found bordering open water , marshes or as seep areas on irrigated lands. Vegetation may include cattails, sedges, rushes, arrowhead, burread, and smartweed. Type 4: inland deep fresh marshes. The soil is covered I with 6 inches to 3 feet or more of water during the growing season. They may border open water areas or completely fill shallow lake basins or sloughs. Vegetation may include cattails, wild rice, reeds, arrowhead, and bulrushes. In open areas, submergence of II floating-leaved plants such as pond weeds, duckweeds, coontail, or waterlilies may occur. Type 5: inland fresh open water. Shallow ponds and reservoirs are included in this type. Water is usually less than 10 feet deep and is fringed by a border of emergent vegetation. Vegetation (mainly at water depths of less than 6 feet) may include pondweeds, naiads, II wild celery, coontail, muskgrasses, water milfoils, and water lilies. I I Type 6: Shrub swamps. The soil is usually waterlogged during the growing season, and is often covered with as much as 6 inches of water. They occur along sluggish streams and ' floodplains, but many are isolated. Vegetation may include alders, willows, dogwood, and buttonbrush, as well as some ' herbaceous growths. Type 7: Wooded swamps. The soil is waterlogged to within a few inches of its surface during the ' growing season, and occasionally is covered • with as much as 1 foot of water. Wooded swamps occur along sluggish streams and I floodplains. Vegetation may include maple, ash, birch, aspen, and an understory with willows, dogwood, and alders. ' Type 8: Boas. The soil is usually waterlogged and supports a spongy covering of mosses. Bogs occur mostly in shallow lake basins, on flat uplands, and along sluggish streams. Typical ,. plants are heath shrubs, sphagnum moss, cranberries, sedges, and cotton grass. B. New Fish and Wildlife Service Classification System (from Cowardin et al. ) EXAMPLE: "P EM 1 C" Wetland ' First Character = System (P = palustrine system) ' Second Character = Class (EM = emergent class) ' Third Character = Subclass (1 = persistent subclass) Fourth Character = Modifying Term (C = seasonally flooded) . 1 Planning Commission Meeting July 18, 1990 - Page 11 1 18. The applicant shall comply with the conditions of the conservation ' easement located on the northerly 20 feet of the property . 19. The proposed expansion area set forth in the plan is not being 1 considered as a part of this approval . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 1 Conrad: Is there a motion on the subdivision? Erhart: I 'll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the I prelimnary plat request #90-9 as shown on the plat dated June 18 , 1990 rewording this to state that the applicant shall amend the plat to show the, typical easements and so on and so on . Conrad: Is there a second? Ellson: Second . ' Batzli: I like the so on and so on part . ' Erhart moved, Ellson seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Preliminary Plat Request #90-9 Subdivision, as shown on the plat dated June 18, 1990 subject to the following conditions: ' 1 . The applicant shall amend the plat to show the typical easements 10 foot south ( front ) and 5 feet on the north , east and west (sides ) . The' applicant shall show the 20 foot wide preservation easement . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Conrad: This item will go to City Council August 13th? Sound right? Okay . Good . Thank you for coming in. Welcome to Chanhassen . Thank you all for coming in who had some comments on this item . , WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR ALTERING/REMOVING VEGETATION IN A CLASS B WETLAND LOCATED IN CURRY FARMS SUBDIVISION, JOYCELYN HUGHES. Public Present: Name Address Steve Kern 6540 Devonshire Drive Rob Royscatel 6450 Devonshire Drive John Guy 6341 Teton Doug & Teresa Bearrood 6490 Bretton Way Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report . Conrad: What's the rationale Jo Ann for the 30%? II Planning Commission Meeting IIJuly 18 , 1990 - Page 12 IIOlsen: Well it was just, it preserved the 70% of the vegetation . Again we were going with how much can be removed and have it still be functional . IIConrad: What 's the function of this particular wetland? Olsen: Well it's serving as water retention for the subdivision . The IIvegetation serves as . Conrad: It 's a drain? IIOlsen: It 's all connected. Conrad: And where does it drain to? IIOlsen: I 'm not exactly sure which direction it goes. Ultimately it goes into Christmas Lake . I 'm not sure which direction . They all end up over 1 in Christmas Lake . So yeah, they definitely clean the water . The vegetation takes a lot of the phospherous and all the fertilizers . It does eventually end up in Christmas Lake and they are planning that this . . .is much better than what it was just . . . IIConrad: Okay , thanks . This is a public hearing . If the applicants would like to say anything . You 're welcome to or we 'll listen to other comments . IITeresa Bearrood: I think she basically said it all for us. IIConrad: Okay . Any other comments? Steve Kern: My name is Steve Kern . I live on 6540 Devonshire Drive . I just wanted to put in my thoughts . I hope the approval goes through for I the folks . I feel that there would be enough vegetation to do the things necessary that they talked about the wetlands do for the area for our wildlife . The 30% to 60% program seems very reasonable and also with all I the wetlands in the community and the lakes and things that we have around us, it doesn't seem as though. . .taking advantage of birds or things nesting in some of the grass . . . There 's still plenty of grasslands around for II wildlife to live in and someone mentioned maybe safety but I feel that the water can or cannot be as dangerous as weeds in the water or not . Also , most people enjoy the visual appeal of some open water . I think this enhances the Chanhassen area by having some of the areas partly open water IIinstead of fully covered. Conrad: Thank you . Other comments . IRob Royscatel : My name is Rob Royscatel . I live at 6450 Devonshire. My concern is that I don't know if I really agree with the alteration for two II reasons . You talked about drainage and as you know, this apparently used to be a stream before this development went in. I live up on like on the right hand side there right as the road comes into the development and behind our house I don't think there 's any standing water at all . I guess 1 I hear talk about open water and I saw the picture that she was taking out to give to you. I don't know, is there still standing water back there now? II Planning Commission Meeting July 18 , 1990 - Page 13 Olsen: Are you talking in this area? Rob Royscatel : Yeah. I 'm right when the road comes in and bends from that' area right in there . Olsen: You 've got the wetland vegetation. Whether or not it 's open water " in there , I 'm not exactly sure . Rob Royscatel : Is there open water now on the areas that you're describing? Olsen: Yes . Rob Royscatel : Because I could understand in a year like this where there I might be open water where we have 3 times the natural rainfall . I don't know if it was that was 2 years ago or if it will be that way next year . Again , I don 't really see the benefit of having open water and I hear talk 111 about weeds and unsightly weeds . To me cattails and those type of things are not why I bought the land . So my first point is , is there really a drainage problem and what purpose do these things serve and I don't preten be .a biologist or whatever . A person that would understand it but the way it was to begin with is it was a stream and I don't know if there 's pools there now or not but if it needs to be open water , then I can understand that but I would suggest that the weeds would help to keep the water clean and the weeds are not unsightly but I like , that 's my own interpretation. The second point I want to bring out is I 've already eluded to and that is that there 's a lot of natural beauty in this area . II We 're not living in Minneapolis. We're living in Chanhassen and that's why I moved out here . If I would like to have my yard back into another yard I, would have moved to Minneapolis or somewhere closer to town . What I like about my area is that there's a few weeds, cattails and birds and nature and everything else in the backyard and I don't think there is any water in my backyard . What concerns me is if we make a change here , and you're I talking about going into where the water hits or having some open water , what's to say that the neighbors behind my plot of land might just come all the way through and take everything out because there probably isn't any standing water there. Steve Kerns: If there's standing water or not, you can only take out a certain percentage of the vegetation or you pond a wetland area. So they I take out let 's say 10% or 20%. That almost limits the surrounding homes from ever taking out anymore so what they do probably limits everyone else from ever . . . ' Rob Royscatel: The other thing that concerned me a little is, if you could put the picture up of the proposed alteration. The one that shows the way it is lying currently and where it 's proposed and so on. When I look at this picture and I take a look at the total area of what was there and now what 's been removed, that's far in excess of 30%. It doesn't take any math major to figure that out . It's more like 50 or more . If you're saying 30%, I see the line being or the vegetation being halfway up from where it is or even more . Just take the total area there and take out 30% . That to 1 Planning Commission Meeting July 18, 1990 - Page 14 me is a lot more than 30. Maybe it 's to scale, I don't know but in any case what I see as the owner in this case or both owners would like to get it as close to the lot line as they can. I don't know where this 30%-60% is coming from . Any percent to me is too much . I guess what I 'm concerned about is setting precedent . Maybe it works with this piece of land, I don 't know but like I said, behind the property that I own, there isn 't ' standing water so what 's to say that you don't have another meeting next month for somebody that would like to take the whole thing out behind my area and if one of these plots goes all the way across this ravine that 's ' now there , it 's going to look kind of goofy. If one does , you might as well do them all and my point to begin with is that I like this area because I don 't have two yards coming back to back where I like it with what they 'd call unsightly weeds . That to me is nice. I like cattails . I like birds . I like nature . Conrad: Thanks for your comments . Other comments . ' John Guy: John Guy . I live on the conservation easement that goes on top of the hill and I had a chance to see this area tonight . Listening to II other comments kind of turned out a couple questions for me . The 30 some rule would make sense to me but there's a couple questions I 'd like to ask staff . As long as it 's saying that they can go to a certain line . What I 'd feel uncomfortable with is if they can in fact go into the pond itself I and clean it up . I 'm not a naturalist but it seems to me like that could in fact damage it . As we 're standing in the backyard this evening , I saw a couple of birds that I didn 't recognize . I know there 's two red and blackbird nests right through that area and I would hate to think that we ' could make some alterations to that area and damage some of those habitats . A question for staff . How. . .live around an area , does fertilizer cause II concern for the . . .preservation or anything like that and can we in fact do something to attack that? Olsen: The best protection is keeping all the vegetation that you can. IIThe wetland vegetation . John Guy: In the wetland. But if we put a finished lot right up to the Iedge of the pond is that what I understand? Olsen: Right . Again, we prefer to keep them all natural completely around and even with the Council we were given direction to work out a compromise . 1 And so that 's where we came up with. John Guy: And that 's because of the encroachment of the people on the IIother side . . . That's taking advantage of the situation. Krauss: There's some truth to that but there's more to it than that . One I of the things we 're dealing with is we don't have an official map that shows where wetlands are and some of those folks, we do have a map that shows where some of the larger ones are and some of those folks actually contacted the City and saw that map and assumed they were on safe ground 11 and unfortunately they're not because our wetlands ordinance has a much wider definition of what a wetland is . We're taking a number of measures to hopefully do a more comprehensive study of our wetlands in the next year I • • 1 Planning Commission Meeting July 18, 1990 - Page 15 1 so that we do have a comprehensive map. We 'd like to update our ordinance" so they're better , more current and use better techniques and judge the quality of wetlands. We 're trying to develop ways of putting home buyers in on better notice . A lot of these folks when they got their survey, it doesn't say wetland back there. It just says drainage easement. Now I know it 's a wetland because I know what we approved on the plat but they didn 't know so I think honestly there was a sincere breakdown of communication there and yes , some people did build without permission . That 's true but a lot of people really didn't understand what they were doing . It 's not a situation we like and we don 't want this to set a II precedent for other ones where we 've been able to hold the line but given everything that 's happened here , it was felt that some sort of a compromise is reasonable. We felt that we should work our a compromise , we brought i folks from DNR and Fish and Wildlife to say what can we reasonably work with. What can we do that would least damage the integrity of the wetland and that 's where that 30% guideline came up . John Guy: Is it 30% of the perimeter of the whole area? 1 Olsen: It 's 30% of the perimeter . We would prefer that it 's kind of throughout . That they have vegetation. Some open area of vegetation . What happened with this case is that almost over half or -about half the perimeter is park which will always remain. Emmings: He 's asking how deep is the perimeter and I have the same question . What does perimeter mean? Olsen: Oh . Around . ' Emmings: I know it means around but how deep? How far? II Olsen: That 's where the 60% and say you have vegetation completely around and you can go 30% of that and then, what we 're saying is that you could maybe say . . .like 100 feet across and you could go in 30 , however it came II out so you had 60% open water . If we remove vegetation so you have , so there 's 60% open surface water . That is so, what you do is you kind of get the surface area and then how far you can go in. , John Guy: When you figure, how far in is the water? Olsen: Right now it's pretty much all cattails in the open water . The water , the ordinary high water mark . Rob Royscatel: The water is right above that line. 1 Olsen: Yeah, it's all the way around. Rob Royscatel: There 's a retaining wall where those solid lines are. John Guy: . . .how low that water typically is? I mean this year is so unusual . I I II Planning Commission Meeting IIJuly 18, 1990 - Page 16 tOlsen: . . .surveyed the ordinary high water mark . . .and that 's where the water is and they do have outlets . . . I think it eventually goes to IChristmas Lake . Rob Royscatel : Would you repeat that? You said the drainage tiles are set up . . . IOlsen: There 's an outlet so the water will only get to a certain level before the water starts going out. IJohn Guy: Well this sounds like a political issue with the City Council but the issue of compromising because someone else made a mistake . We should be working to reclaim the wetland areas . Not drain them out . I I don 't have a problem if the experts say that this won 't affect and endanger this wetland area . This homeowner should be allowed to do something to help finish their backyards but if it endangers the wetland area , just I because somebody else made a mistake , I 'd have an objection to that . I don 't know who my City Council is . I moved here in March so maybe I need to make a call to my politician . <' Conrad: The Mayor 's in listening to you right now . Any other comments? Steve Kerns: I just want to say that in this flyer that they handed out to I some of the residents , where it talks about what fill could take place and what couldn't , it 's pretty specific about but only when it will not have a negative adverse affect upon the ecological characteristics of the wetland . I It goes on to 5 different points . It 's kind of showing the ordinance and things set up within your ordinance so that things like maybe some rock that 's not going to harm anything. Things still drain and maybe just remove some weeds . We understand the concern about fertilizer being up II close but again am I to understand they 're only able to remove vegetation within their property line? IConrad: That would be the case. Steve Kerns: So it 's still . . . IJohn Guy: But that property line goes deep within that pond. In fact it may go all the way through it. IOlsen: Yeah, this shows the property line. John Guy: And that shaded area is in fact the pond . IOlsen: That 's where the ordinary high water mark is. I Rob Royscatel : . . .the opposing property line on the other side comes all the way until it gets to our property line and there 's a very large section that is wetlands . I guess I 'm concerned that they could come all the way up the side . IOlsen: With the wetland vegetation . I Planning Commission Meeting July 18 , 1990 - Page 17 1 Rob Royscatel : Maybe not now with the 30% . . .but you 're saying 60% can be I cleared? Olsen: The area that he 's describing is another issue too where that was I not wetland to begin with and now it is . It 's taken on the qualities of a wetland with the drainage . With the new development and that 's a whole other issue . We have to adjust at some time now do we apply those same rules. Steve Kerns: Do we have any idea how many people are aware of were aware I when they purchased the land that certain areas were wetland? Olsen: I don't have the exact number . I 've talked with people who were I not aware and I 've also talked with people who were aware . Rob Royscatel : All I can speak of is from my personal experience and when I was about to purchase this piece of property , it was made very clear to I me that the entire back area as well as these other two that we 're describing now are wetlands and will be forever protected . And I was even told about someone who already received a fine for pulling a few cattails I and that to me indicated yeah, it 's going to be enforced. It 's in place and obviously they do advise when they broke the law they got fined . Again , I can 't speak for anyone else that purchased land in this area but it was made very clear to me that this was an ordinance in effect and it would be enforced . Emmings: Who told you that? ' Rob Royscatel : The seller for Curry Farms . John Guy: Well I second that. I thought it was very clearly to me . I didn 't have an attorney to review everything so I 'm not sure if there 's some legal document that in force enforces this but it was clearly communicated and all the plats the developer gave us marked out clearly where this area was and conservation easement. . . There 's no ambiguity in my, mind . Maybe 2 years ago when they started , maybe there was. Conrad: Do wetlands get recorded against a parcel or a plat? Olsen: Right . Conrad: They do but they only do when we've got them officially mapped? Or how do you take the developer 's subdivision? I don't understand the process of recording . Olsen: Well , Curry Farms kind of , this one it wasn't recorded against each of the lots and why it wasn 't , I don't know the answer to that. Conrad: Who's job is it to do that? Olsen: Well , it 's in, Planning's partly responsible . We tell what 's to be, recorded and a lot of times it's just a process. 1 . . Planning Commission Meeting ilJuly 18, 1990 - Page 18 IEmmings: But now we 've got a new system. This would not happen today. Olsen: No . Now we specifically do it against each lot . We even have a I conservation easement . We have conditions. ' I mean as each subdivision goes through , we add more as we learn from past mistakes and Curry Farms unfortunately was one of the first ones to really, where we really I converted wetlands into storm water ponds that were going to be backyards and we made some mistakes . We really protected the larger Class A wetland and then we had that , an easement over the other ones with that condition that they could not be altered but I don't know. 1 Conrad: Still a public hearing. Any other comments? I Doug Bearrood: I 'm Doug Bearrood and I 'm the owner of one of the lots with the wetland . I 'd just like to say we bought our lot . . .we bought in 1988 which. . .and when we bought it was open water . There were no cattails . Nothing and we know that , we never heard from the seller that this was a II wetland or that this was something that we couldn't alter and we haven 't . . . change either . All of a sudden in 2 years it's drastically changed and now we 're basically on a marsh which isn't so bad. We do like the birds and :' stuff but it 's not like when we purchased the lot , that wasn't what we saw . That 's not what we 're getting now . Conrad: I know what you 're saying . ' Teresa Berrood: I 'm Teresa Berrood and I again have that same lot . What we want to do with it is not remove every single cattail . All we want to I do is clear it out somewhat so we can at least see the water . Last summer we had a family of ducks that . . .the cattails and we would just like to remove some of them . Like I said, we wanted to remove what was allowable . I The 30% . We have planned already. We have sod going down to about 4 feet from the start of the cattails and we want to put wildflowers, some kind of ground cover down there . I mean I don't want to see my fertilizer run off I into the pond and then into Christmas Lake either but all we wanted to do was clean it up some . I don 't want to go through the work of making it look like when we purchased it but we just want it cleaned up a little bit so we don 't look at it and say nice swamp. I mean it was a pond when we I bought it and that 's the way we want it, We're going to follow guidelines . I mean I guess I really feel like we have sat here and waited for quite a while and have been very patient and not gone down and ripped other things I out like some of the other residents in Curry Farms have because we filled out our forms . Filled out our applications and we're trying to follow the rules and if Fish and Wildlife wants us to do something, that's what we 'll do and if they're recommending 30%, that's what Council should approve. IConrad: Thank you . Any other comments? Is there a motion to close the public hearing? IBatzli moved, Erhart seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. IErhart: The people that removed the material before, what are we talking about here? Removing . Is that mowing? Is that poison? Are you talking • Planning Commission Meeting July 18, 1990 - Page 19 about using a backhoe? Olsen: I 'm not exactly sure how they did it . They did it though and it 's I now, there 's sod and stone around it . I don 't know . Steve Kerns: I just want to say that over by my„ the wetland on my property , the bulldozer that graded our lot backed up into the wetland and I dug it out while that vegetation was. . . That 's where that little piece is moved here . And then we were told that we could sod over the grading whic was about 15 feet under the protected wetland edge . So I 'm just saying to that part of that took place just by the fact that it was not controlled b the person grading the lot. It wasn't a controlled situation. Erhart: Okay . My point is , I mean if this is wet . The soils are wet here" and if they haven't gone in and changed the elevation, the only way they 're going to keep the cattails from growing back in there , they're going to have to continue to mow it unless they put so many rocks and plastic or something . Is there a line involved here and can you walk out to those lots that have been altered and say this is the line that you can't go beyond? Is there a line someplace on some drawing? ' Olsen: Well we went out and surveyed where the ordinary high water mark was and yes you can see where some of the lots have filled below that and I have sodded or put in a few stones . Erhart: Okay , what are we talking? What 's the law here? The ordinary high water mark or is there an easement line someplace that didn't get recorded? Olsen: There 's an easement that , I don't know if you can see it but the dotted line , that 's the easement . This is an easement line . Erhart: What does that easement mean? ' Olsen: That 's what went over the ordinary , the ponding area and where there's going to be possibly over? Erhart: Anything beyond that line they're not supposed to mow? Krauss: No, it's where the expected flood elevation of that pond is as I described by a straight line that a surveyor shows so it doesn't exactly follow the contour . Erhart: What does the easement say? What does it say? I can't do what I within there? Krauss: You can't fill down there. You can't build down there. , Erhart: But you can mow down there? Krauss: Yep . ' Planning Commission Meeting July 18, 1990 - Page 20 ' Erhart: Alright so they can mow and they could put rocks in so then what , then we 're down to the ordinary high water mark . Then that is the line that says you can't mow beyond that and put in rock? Olsen: Where the wetland vegetation . Krauss: The wetland contour . ' Erhart: That has never been intended to be on an easement or recorded against the lot . ' Krauss: Well that 's what we want to do now . Erhart: We do that now in other areas? We record the ordinary high water mark against . Olsen: We record an elevation. ' Erhart: Can we do that now on these lots? Krauss: We have no authority to go back in and do that . Olsen: You do that when they 're platted . ' Batzli : Sure you do . It 'd just be a taking . Olsen: Well yeah . Krauss: You can do it as a condition of . . . .' Erhart: What are you trying to do now? Are you intending to go in and to maintain this , keep cattails from growing again? Do you plan on mowing that area or how do you plan on doing that? They 're going to come back if ' you don't keep hacking. What you 're saying is you 're proposing to keep hacking below the ordinary high water mark and that's what the Fish and Wildlife is saying is that 's okay? Is that? Krauss: They 're not saying it's a wonderful idea . They're saying if you were going to work out a compromise, here's how to do it. ' Erhart: But I tend to agree with the other two arguments here. The way it sounds to me . If there's clearly a line that we can say that's the ordinary high water mark. If you can go out there and survey off on those lots and if by exception is the only way that they will maintain mowing, then what ' you ought to just say hey, you can't touch anything below that and alright so you mowed it now but it's going to grow back. Let it grow back and call it , that's it . The intent was that anything below the ordinary high water ' mark was supposed to be left in it 's natural condition and even though it was disturbed , you now have to allow it to grow back in it 's natural condition . To me that seems too simple. Maybe I 'm missing something here ' but it seems compared against all the work that you've done on this , it seems like a simple solution. What am I missing? I don't know. Planning Commission Meeting July 18 , 1990 - Page 21 Ellson: The fact that they got direction from Council to try to do this thing . Erhart: No, they already did it . , Conrad: No, these people haven't . Another group already did . These folks' are trying to work through the process. Erhart: I understand but I 'm talking about the first two people that went in and did it . They didn't get any direction and it seems to me that if II they basically are told okay , you did it but now you can't go maintain it, that eventually most of it will just grow back to cattails. Isn't that what will happen? So then why don't we just say you can't touch it anymore? Krauss: Well you could but that wouldn't achieve their goals . Erhart: I know what their goals are but you 've also got two people here II that they object and quite frankly when you go in and develop a neighborhood , if they wanted to make this thing into an open pond , they II should have dug it deeper . Essentially any water that you've got that 's less than 3 feet deep will grow, it's just going to happen and somebody , whoever designed the neighborhood should have made a decision at that time., You either make these ponds 5 feet deep or not and then to go back and do it now would take the collective agreement of everybody that's got land on that pond as opposed to trying to do it one at a time. It doesn 't make sense to try to do this one at a time. If they want a pond, I 'm not against a pond . But then it should take everybody collectively ought to get together and say let 's all build a pond and I 'm okay with that too. Krauss: I guess that 's sort of the way we've been trying to handle this . I the one that you're not reviewing tonight . The one where there was a lot of disruption , what they 're trying to do and Jo Ann can correct me if I 'm wrong, is get their act together because it's probably about 15 homeowners I there . I would guess 7 or 8 of which have already altered the thing and we've told them they've all got to come to some understanding as to where the open water 's going to be . How it's going to be maintained. Who's I going to get the shoreline. Creating open water in a Class B wetland is often advantageous and in principle something we've allowed before because it allows better habitat value. We're kind of backing into that I guess with this . Erhart: They're not creating open water here from what I understand. What' they 're doing is you're mowing down cattails. Doug Bearrood: We're creating open water for us to see. Erhart: You 're cutting down a visual barrier . ' Conrad: They're also creating open water . Erhart: How are you going to do that? You'd have to mow under water . I don't understand how you're creating open water . I . . Planning Commission Meeting IIJuly 18, 1990 - Page 22 I Doug Bearrood: When you pull the cattails out . IErhart: They 'll grow right back unless you continue to do that . Doug Bearrood: I understand how the argument goes . From our side , it I seems a little unfair that the Curry Farms developer didn't tell us the situation . When we saw the lot and bought it , our first home , that's what we expected to have back there and it changed on us . IConrad: We understand that . We know where you 're coming from . Erhart: I understand that but it certainly makes sense to me , if I had a ' , lot , I 'd try to get all the neighbors together and get a plan that we all decided to do and pay for it and get it done . I Teresa Bearrood: All the neighbors . . . I mean the other two neighbors that are basically affected by this . . .2 up on that drawing, they have decided to do nothing . They don 't want anything done and 6 on the drawing also, they II have decided to do nothing. It's just 4 and 5. The Hughes and us that want to do anything so it kind of has , I mean that pond, all 5 families have decided what they want to do and we 're the ones that wanted to use . . . ;I. Conrad: Just as a footnote and you knew I 'd have to jump in on this one sooner or later but Chanhassen spent a lot of time trying to protect wetlands . We put in our own wetland ordinance . We probably spent 3 years of about 7 people 's time trying to figure out how to preserve Class B ' wetlands . How to improve them . How to maintain them so a lot of energy and we as a Planning Commission probably spend 2 hours every 2 weeks II reviewing permits just like yours . A lot of people were deceived in terms of what they thought they were buying . A lot of people have monetary motivation . What our studies did and all the folks that came in and talked to us and we got expert testimony from what we perceived to be the real I experts and those wetlands did a lot of things for Chanhassen. It created a whole lot of things which we 're trying to preserve so, and water quality was one of those things . And wetlands , as you start taking out cattails, II cattails are probably one of the best vegetative bodies to clear out pollution. Grass does nothing . Grass is literally nothing in the way of pollution. A cattails has a lot of fiber . It really captures pollution I and all the fertilizers we put in so we've spent a whole lot of time trying to figure out how to maintain quality when we have all this development coming into Chanhassen and so, in a 2 minute summary and I don't want to get too far into it, that 's what we 're playing with. Every 2 weeks we are II playing the role of trying to preserve and manage wetlands and within the light of our ordinance without setting precedence . Without saying hey, if they can do it , well then as soon as you break an ordinance and then you I basically don't have an ordinance anymore because it can be contested. The second you have an exception to it , then the next party can say well , you 've allowed an exception. Therefore you no longer have that rule unless it was a unique situation. So I wanted to just give you that background . II That 's where we 're coming from. A whole lot of background in Chanhassen but Tim, go on . Planning Commission Meeting July 18, 1990 - Page 23 Erhart: Yeah, I 've got one other thing. The people that are objecting to I this , are you objecting to this particular thing specifically or are you objecting to the concept of doing this? Rob Royscatel : Personally this particular location does not affect our land at all . I 'm objecting to the concept . Erhart: Okay, and you 're not talking about this particular pond? You're I talking about . John Guy: I share that whole conservation area with these owners. I 'm ' 6341 Teton on top of the hill but in general I share the general area . I 'm not on that pond. Ahrens: It 's on the park right? John Guy: Right . Erhart: Again, I am not against improving wetlands but it seems to me that we were going against this if we 're setting up a situation where I continually year after year go in and disturb what we have set aside as a wetland . That 's I guess the problem I 'm having with it . I have no problem in getting rid of some of the cattails and open water . I think that could ' be an improvement . Krauss: Fundamentally the right way to do that is the way that it 's normally done is that when it freezes over you go in there with a backhoe . You dig a hole 5 feet deep. Erhart: Right , so go ahead Steve . Emmings: It 's hard to know where to start. Really what you're proposing here to me flies in the face of everything we've been doing and I think this is kind of what Ladd said. Maybe I 'm just repeating what he said but ' this is a wetland . Our policy does not allow alteration of wetlands . It never has. We've made people that have altered wetlands go back and take those alterations out . We just .got done doing that on Lotus Lake . Putting" in a garden in a wetland is not improving the wetland. I 've never heard oll that kind of a proposal before. It sounds nice . I 've got nothing against gardens. I have one myself but doing it in a wetland is just, that is not I an improvement to a wetland. Now, moving on a little bit. Erhart: Can I clarify one thing? We do allow improvements. Conrad: We do allow improvements . Yeah . Emmings: And like Tim said, if this was a plan where over in this other block here where you've got a wetland completely surrounded by private property owners and they came in and said this looks this way now and we want to create some open water over here and have some natural areas over I here and dig this thing up and we're all in agreement with this plan and what was deemed to be an improvement to that wetland by the Fish and Wildlife Service and stuff , I 'd be all for it. Just narrowing down to this 1 . . Planning Commission Meeting July 18, 1990 - Page 24 ' one a little bit more, even if you were going to apply the 70-30 rule , it would seem to me that no individual landowner ought to get to do more than ' 30% on his individual lot. These two are exhausting the capacity to do 30% of the perimeter almost on their two lots and that's not right because then you 're taking, number one you're taking away the potential for other property owners to do it . Whether half of it 's in park or not I think is irrelevant because they may want to sometime in the future and they won 't be able to . Number two , it keeps the amount that you alter down to a minimum so I can see that you would want to clear out to be able to see to ' water . That has some appeal and makes some sense . If Fish and Wildlife says that you can remove 30% of the perimeter , although I 'm really unclear about how this formula works with area and stuff . That is not at all ' obvious to me anyway but if by clearing 3 feet of cattails on 30% of my frontage gives me a view of the open water , that doesn 't seem unreasonable to me as long as Fish and Wildlife says that that 's not detrimental to the wetland . But , going all the way back , our policy 's always been no ' alteration and I don 't see any reason to change it . Conrad: No alteration unless improvement . ' Emmings: Unless it 's an improvement . And this is not an improvement in the sense that we 've always used that word . ' Batzli : Really but if in fact they were , improvement might be a little bit misleading . It 's kind of no net loss . I mean if they were going to improve a portion or add wetlands someplace else , you might allow them to do this . Emmings: Yeah, we 've done that . ' Batzli : Yeah . Emmings: And then the other thing is, I don't know why we can't go back ' and record the fact . Why can 't we go back and record this against these properties so that at least the person that buys from these folks has some notice that this is something that was on the plat? I don't know why we can't do that. Krauss: Well I 'll defer it to the attorneys amongst us but we've had problems recording things because the owners change hands and we don 't have the right to record something against somebody's property. Ahrens: No , you can't do it. Emmings: You can't do it? ' Ahrens: No . Ellson: Not even a little note in the file? Ahrens: Unless the City is willing to go in and take some court action . First of all it 's all registered land. It 's all torrenced land which means that you have to go in a proceedings subsequent and ask the court to make a 11 Planning Commission Meeting July 18, 1990 - Page 25 r 'determination to allow or a decision to allow you to record documents involuntarily against people 's land . The courts are somewhat relunctant to do that understandably. I mean otherwise we could all face that situation so no, they won 't let you do that . As a matter of fact , Curry Farms not only forgot to record the easements but they didn't record any of the Covenants and Restrictions against the land and on they're on the phone begging people to turn over their Certificates of Title so they can do that . Of course a lot of people said no . Emmings: Well what recourse do we have against a developer who doesn't do I what he 's supposed to do? Ellson: Slap on the wrist. Olsen: It 's getting kind of late . Again too you know we always have the development contract or we can withhold building permits . Emmings: Does he own more land in this town that he wants to develop? Well he 's got gigantic developments here but I was just wondering if he has any more land because if he comes in again I sure want to talk to him . Olsen: . . .should go through, yes we can record. Emmings: Why do we leave this to the developer? From now on will the City' be taking care of that? Krauss: Steve , that was one of my original questions here and when I came I on, when I started talking to Roger , our City Attorney , and he 's got a proposal for his office to handle the recording of all plats and easements which I 'm pretty sure we 're going to go with. ' Emmings: Yeah. I can't vote for this . Conrad: Anything else Steve? ' Emmings: No. Conrad: Annette. ' Ellson: I can't either . I can't agree at all to compromise our wetland ordinance . It 's a terribly dangerous precedence . I can understand the position that the City Council must have been in to try to compromise to make people happy but I think it's way too important . Like you said, we just told people who had loosestrife which is 10 times worse than a cattail' out there , that they had to build a board to get out onto their lake frontage . It's not unusual for somebody to move in next to a lake and a year later it looks different than it did before and it 's all part of being' next to nature. I don't think the argument of I didn't know can necessarily be used and then say it 's okay. Then if you don't know, you 're okay but if you do know, because the argument, you're going to start advising people to just claim you don't know and you'll be able to get a slap on the wrist and take off or something like that so I think it's a nature conservation measure. If you polled the city, everybody would want 1 Planning Commission Meeting July 18, 1990 - Page 26 it . It 's like Ladd said, we 're developing so big. One of the things we want to preserve is water quality and this is the strongest thing we can do ' to try to do that and I think the City Council could reconsider of thinking of a compromise or something because it's too dangerous . I can't imagine somebody coming back later and not using it as a precedence. So I 'd say absolutely not . ' Batzli : I have very little additional to add from the proceeding two comments . I think if they were going to improve the wetland I 'd be willing ' to look at it. I also, I couldn't approve it with these conditions because I don't understand the perimeter concept along with Steve and I think it 's too ambiguous to approve with the current conditions. ' Conrad: Jim? Wildermuth: I have almost nothing to add except to say that I 'm just amazed that Fish and Wildlife was willing to compromise . I think that 's pretty surprising . One recommendation I guess I would have would be to the residents around this thing , would be to come in possibly with a plan to raise the level if they want open water . To raise the level of the water in the wetland . That might be a possibility . ' Erhart: Raise the outlet level? Wildermuth: Right . ' Erhart: Yeah . John Guy: . . .where it drains to but I currently have a water problem in my backyard . Raising the level may or may not affect that . I don't know . Wildermuth: Well I think that would be something that would have to be looked at by all the agencies involved including the City Engineer . I Krauss: What you typically do though to achieve open water is you excavate out below the existing floor of the wetland. That has no bearing at all on I the hydraulics of the pond because the outlet's still the same but what it does is the material just can't root there . IErhart: What controls the lave of this? Didn't you say it was a culvert? Krauss: There's an outlet . I Erhart: A culvert or what? Who set, is there any reason why you couldn't raise that culvert 3 feet? I Krauss: Well right now it would be very difficult to raise it because it comes out underneath streets and you've got to move the whole thing . IErhart: You can turn them. Put a riser in the end. Krauss: Yes you can but then you start . . . I • Planning Commission Meeting July 18, 1990 - Page 27 Wildermuth: Either way . Whether you raise the level or you excavate it out the material , you're creating open water . Conrad: Joan? I Ahrens: Well I have very few comments. Very little to add after the good comments that have been made but I live in Curry Farms and I live on a wetland. I was told when I moved into the property that we lived on a wetland and I know that everyone else that lives, there's about 9 houses who live on the wetland I live on and there's been absolutely no alteration) except for one homeowner who's dumped a truckload of rocks onto his backyard to try to improve , I don't know if he thinks it's improving the wetland but he's trying to get the weeds down. The weeds have grown up through the plastic and through the rocks and it looks pretty terrible . I think that because the City made a mistake or maybe made a mistake is no reason for us to continue in our wayward ways. I think that 's a pretty ridiculous reasoning . Certainly parents wouldn't allow that with their children. I don't know why we should allow that either . I can't go along with the staff recommendation at all . I don't think a political compromise is appropriate and that 's all I have to say. ' Conrad: Okay, thanks Joan . I 'd just like to thank the Hughes' for coming in. I know it 's frustrating to hear us talk like this and you 're probably " a little bit irritated with what we 're saying. Are you the Bearrood 's? Doug Bearrood: Yes . Conrad: I 'm sorry . I can pronounce Hughes. I can't pronounce your last name . That 's why , okay . But again, I thank you for coming in. Again , we really do appreciate folks that try to work with the system. Typically wejl can work . Typically in the long run things happen for the best and you ma not see it tonight but again, before I make my comments I just wanted to thank you . Sometimes we don't have people that try to work with us like you are. I 'm a little bit concerned about the precedent that we'd set in this particular case . I don't know how we'd back off of the precedent . I don't understand the 30-60 rule . That seems real foggy to me. I think we should try to improve the wetland. I think the bottom line is , if you can " get your neighbors to work with you to try to improve. This seems like a piecemeal approach to something and maybe that's the way we steered you. Sometimes we steer you because you have the wetland alteration. Because II you asked for something, staff's going to steer you to say well you can come in and do something and we kind of steer you in one direction and maybe we should have been saying hey . Try to get all the residents that In that wetland together and maybe there's one general approach that worked for all of you . That may not work because there are people that do appreciate wetlands and the cattails and therefore it's a little bit harder to get a consensus of a group and it forces you to communicate with your neighbors and maybe sink some money into it but in my mind I would have, I haven't seen the right solution today for this problem. I really do have a feeling about a precedent that we'd set and I think it's just wise to, well on my part , I will vote against this . I think the City Council has some other , they have directed staff to review this positively and I think that we are going to, it sounds pretty much to me we're going to be in consensus" Planning Commission Meeting July 18 , 1990 - Page 28 here on not accepting it but I think the City Council has a different perspective on this . At least they directed staff a different way so I ' think you're going to want to hear what the City Council says in this regard but in my mind I haven't been persuaded that we have the reasons or the method to alter this particular wetland at this time. If we do and we have done that quite a few times , we can always improve the quality of the water . We can always improve the habitat and many times we can improve the filtration capabilities if we try to improve it in a certain way . I don 't think what I 've seen today is that way . Any other comments? Emmings: Just one . You know if the City feels that it owes these people something because of some role of the City in misleading them or whatever , ' which I don 't really see , since the City owns half the land around this pond maybe they could be a contributor to an improvement project on the pond . Do their pendance that way . ' Ahrens: I have one more comment . Question for the staff . I assume that once word gets out that the applicant for alterations of the wetlands aren't going to go real far in front of the Planning Commission for other ' people who 've already altered their wetlands , what 's going to happen? Are you going to continue to get requests? Olsen: That 's what we were just discussing because we 've told them that ' they have to come through with the process and again, the residents who are here tonight have been very pleasant to work with . So we will have to send them another letter giving them a deadline that they will have to pursue . ' We already have notice and one of the people are here tonight . Mr . Kern, and they know that they do have to come through with the wetland alteration permit process . I think one of the reasons it's taking longer with the ' wetland to the south that has been altered throughout the whole wetland is they are trying to , when we did meet with them, we said that do come in with one overall plan. Everyone in agreement with what you wanted to have ' done ultimately and I think that they 're still working on that . I don 't know if they 're actively pursuing it. I 'm assuming they are but we will continue to , staff still sees it as violation of the ordinance and that they do have to go through the permit process. 1 Emmings: Does that group have a spokesperson that you have contact with? ' Olsen: Yes . Emmings: I think you should send them our Minutes from this. IOlsen: There 's a couple that I 'll send them to. Conrad: You know we've just got to tackle this wetland deal because I 'm I really getting tired of talking about it and preaching every 2 weeks . There 's this mystic about the wetland alteration permit. It 's like a building permit . It 's like you can . All you have to do is fill this out Iand really the standards, you know I 'm not sure how you talk. Olsen: We try not to give that impression. I Planning Commission Meeting I July 18, 1990 - Page 29 1 Conrad: Don't you? Okay. See I don 't know but I don't see it on the form so it 's like we don 't really want wetlands altered and there is a way if III can improve it. We 've just got to make sure that that is really communicated up front because it's not like an automatic . I think you 've got to make sure that that is communicated. Any other comments . Batzli : I move that the Planning Commission recommends denial of Wetland II Alteration Permit #90-4 for Lots 4 and 5, Block 2, Curry Farms . Conrad: Is there a second? Ellson: Second. Batzli moved, Ellson seconded that the Planning Commission recommend denial' of Wetland Alteration Permit #90-4 for Lots 4 and 5, Block 2, Curry Farms. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. ' Conrad: This will go to the City Council on August 13th. I appreciate you all for coming in . I thank you for your comments both pro and con . We understand both sides of the coin . Please stay with it because Council will probably have their own opinions on this particular issue so thanks for coming in. SKETCH PLAN REVIEW FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO CREATE AN AUTO SERVICE CENTER WITH A RESTAURANT ON PROPERTY ZONED OH, HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT AND LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF HWY. 5 AND 101, II (HANUS BUILDING), LOTUS REALTY SERVICES. Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item. Conrad: Why don 't we just open it up for comments . We 're not voting on this tonight but I think we're providing the applicant and the City any of I our comments or our guidance as the applicant goes back and tries to manipulate this to meet some of staff 's concerns and maybe our concerns as does it qualify for a PUD in our minds and is this this, what are our II requirements for the entrance to Chanhassen. Do we have an entrance to Chanhassen? Do we care? Does this meet whatever our standards might be? Joan, start at your end. Ahrens: I was going to try to find something positive to say tonight since everything else has been negative. Conrad: You really are negative. , Ahrens: I know. But I can't . , Ellson: I cannot tell a lie. Ahrens: There are a lot of problems I see with this. First of all , maybe we could tie the architecture in with the Dinner Theatre. Only kidding but this is , I 'm not sure that this is what we want if this is going to be the entrance to Chanhassen. This looks real crowded to me first of all . And II